New Torture Memo from Gonzo

[K0RGR]

"WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 — When the Justice Department publicly declared torture “abhorrent” in a legal opinion in December 2004, the Bush administration appeared to have abandoned its assertion of nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.

But soon after Alberto R. Gonzales’s arrival as attorney general in February 2005, the Justice Department issued another opinion, this one in secret. It was a very different document, according to officials briefed on it, an expansive endorsement of the harshest interrogation techniques ever used by the Central Intelligence Agency.

The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.

Mr. Gonzales approved the legal memorandum on “combined effects” over the objections of James B. Comey, the deputy attorney general, who was leaving his job after bruising clashes with the White House. Disagreeing with what he viewed as the opinion’s overreaching legal reasoning, Mr. Comey told colleagues at the department that they would all be “ashamed” when the world eventually learned of it."

NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/washington/04interrogate.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1191542569-H6dP9ctupe7iGMPOE001bw)

OK, so the White House has told the American people, and the Congress many, many, many times that "Americans do not torture". So, I guess they just decided to rename it something else.

"Hello terrorist - we're going to DisneyLand you. If you don't enjoy the rides in our amusement park, they will continue to get more and more intense until you tell us what we want to know..."

[ka5piu]

Hello.

What kind of question are you asking?
Do we belive anything that the administration says has any truth whatsoever?
Or, that we think that he actually forgot?
Remember, this is the Bush administration, anything goes.

[n2nh]

Not crickets...

http://i24.tinypic.com/29em1hx.jpg

[w2amr]

It will take many years to clean up the bush crime family's mess.

[K3XR]

You have already been exposed. for the political hack you are, Rocky.

http://hotair.com/archive....print=1 (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/10/05/torture-memos-democrats-politicizing-the-war-again/?print=1)

[N9XR]

WAGGING THE FINGER

'We do not torture'

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2005/11/07/bush-panama-inside.jpg
Bush Torture Story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-07-bush-terror-suspects_x.htm)

We accept -- No We DEMAND that conservatives lie all the time.

[kg6amw]

The Democrats have offered little on how to win in Iraq or on terror and have focused mainly on running away.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,11:28)]<s><span style='color:gray'>The Democrats have offered little on how to win in Iraq or on terror and have focused mainly on running away.</s></span>

Golly. When the non-sequitur portion of that post is removed, there's nothing of substance left to debate.

Still fighting that vacuum between your ears, OM? That's the third time you posted the same, incredibly stupid statement.

Science has been seeking a perfect vacuum for decades, OM. Perhaps you can be of assistance in that area.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,11:05)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,11:28)]<s><span style='color:gray'>The Democrats have offered little on how to win in Iraq or on terror and have focused mainly on running away.</s></span>

Golly. #When the non-sequitur portion of that post is removed, there's nothing of substance left to debate.

Still fighting that vacuum between your ears, OM? #That's the third time you posted the same, incredibly stupid statement.

Science has been seeking a perfect vacuum for decades, OM. #Perhaps you can be of assistance in that area.
The term used to be &quot;LIKE A BROKEN RECORD.&quot;
focused mainly on running away
click
focused mainly on running away
click
focused mainly on running away
click
focused mainly on running away.................

[kg6amw]

Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,18:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Well, multiple sentences. And we're supposed to just accept this at face value, why?

The bold section in particular is curious. Do you have any specific source for this information, or are your mind reading abilities that acute?

The balance is standard issue neocon sewage.

[K3XR]

What do you think Mrs. Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

http://www.isthatlegal.org/archives/2006/10/torture_necessi.html

http://patterico.com/2007....aseball (http://patterico.com/2007/09/27/hillary-clinton-on-torture-iran-and-baseball/)

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 05 2007,18:43)]What do you think Mrs. Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

http://www.isthatlegal.org/archives/2006/10/torture_necessi.html

http://patterico.com/2007....aseball (http://patterico.com/2007/09/27/hillary-clinton-on-torture-iran-and-baseball/)
patterico - a fascinating <span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:red'>BLOG</span></span> by well known writer &quot;DRJ&quot;.

That is <span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%'>WAY</span> pitiful, dude.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 05 2007,06:28)]WAGGING THE FINGER

'We do not torture'

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2005/11/07/bush-panama-inside.jpg
Bush Torture Story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-07-bush-terror-suspects_x.htm) #

We accept -- No We DEMAND that conservatives lie all the time.
Yeah, I'm gonna believe him. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kg6amw]

Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,15:18)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,18:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. # Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. #It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. #When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. #They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. #Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Well, multiple sentences. #And we're supposed to just accept this at face value, why?

The bold section in particular is curious. #Do you have any specific source for this information, or are your mind reading abilities that acute?

The balance is standard issue neocon sewage.
If you are so blatantly partisan, that would be a colossal waste of my time, wouldn't you agree?

Additionally, I've never seen you offer more than one or two sentences at a time, and most refer only to vague concepts, offering little to the discussion at hand.

No, I don't wish to bore you with the unpleasant details of reality. It's best you continue to occupy your own little time zone, wherever that is.

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 06 2007,09:49)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,15:18)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,18:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Well, multiple sentences. And we're supposed to just accept this at face value, why?

The bold section in particular is curious. Do you have any specific source for this information, or are your mind reading abilities that acute?

The balance is standard issue neocon sewage.
If you are so blatantly partisan, that would be a colossal waste of my time, wouldn't you agree?

Additionally, I've never seen you offer more than one or two sentences at a time, and most refer only to vague concepts, offering little to the discussion at hand.

No, I don't wish to bore you with the unpleasant details of reality. It's best you continue to occupy your own little time zone, wherever that is.
Your lack of creativity is sort of depressing. I guess, with your limited abilities, all you can do is resort to copying the posts of others.

I'm happy I could provide a few complete sentences for you to copy and paste, otherwise, your post would have been completely blank.

Do you strive to underachieve, or does it come naturally?

[ad4mg]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 06 2007,09:49)]Quote[/b] (ad4mg @ Oct. 05 2007,15:18)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,18:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Well, multiple sentences. And we're supposed to just accept this at face value, why?

The bold section in particular is curious. Do you have any specific source for this information, or are your mind reading abilities that acute?

The balance is standard issue neocon sewage.











.
OK, I removed my post that you copied and pasted. I'm not going to be cruel, it isn't nice to pick on those who have issues. Instead, I'll help you deliver your message by typing it for you, and you can copy &amp; paste it, just like making a post of your very own. Here ya go:

--- begin copy at the end of this line ---
&quot;I'm a little uber right-wing neocon foot soldier and I condone, and actually encourage our country to engage in torturing prisoners in the 'war on terror', no matter if it makes us look like the 2nd rate country we're becoming. No cost is too great to advance the agendas of the PNAC inspired neocon, Hannity, and Rush. I support nation building using bombs, and any casualties we incur as a result are 'negligible', and we should 'stay the course', no matter what the rest of the country wants.&quot;
--- end your copying here, at the start of this line ---

There ya go big guy. Don't tell anyone that I helped you ... it can be our little secret.

[K4GUN]

Language is a virus. According to the New York Times, the President gave &quot;nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.&quot; Do the facts back up this statement? Nope. Its one of those examples of the NYT interjecting its editorial comment into a news story. Did the President authorize the cutting out of eyeballs? Did he authorize connecting testicles to car batteries? Did he authorize the CIA or others to rape the daughters of detainees in front of them? How about beheadings. No he didn't because that would be torture.

So what was authorized? we made them cold and made them think they were going to drown. At no point were their lives in danger, nor were they in danger of permanent scars or afflictions. Head slapping? Please. If a stranger slapped your head in public, you'd be lucky to get a simple assault charge against them. Its not attempted murder nor assault with a deadly weapon. Its a smack.

We're not talking about innocent little darlings here either. We're not even talking about armed robbers. We're talking about men who are captured in the act of attempting to kill soldiers on a battlefield. They are horrible people with nothing but evil in their heart. They are members of a death cult who would do anything possible to cause pain and suffering on a massive scale. They know things that we really need to find out. We are a civilized country so we don't do the things they do, but it can work in our favor for them to think we will. That may not be nice, but its a hell of a lot better than what they would do to us.

[G0GQK]

The presidency has been torturing for years everybody who speaks English because its torture to have to listen. And is this Gonzo chappie the same one who used to be in the Muppets ?

G0GQK http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (k4gun @ Oct. 06 2007,07:16)]So what was authorized? #we made them cold and made them think they were going to drown. #At no point were their lives in danger, nor were they in danger of permanent scars or afflictions. #Head slapping? #Please. #If a stranger slapped your head in public, you'd be lucky to get a simple assault charge against them. #Its not attempted murder nor assault with a deadly weapon. #Its a smack. #
How the hell do you know what is going on over there?

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (G0GQK @ Oct. 06 2007,13:12)]The presidency has been torturing for years everybody who speaks English because its torture to have to listen. And is this Gonzo chappie the same one who used to be in the Muppets ?

G0GQK http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Yes, you might say that.

[K0RGR]

Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,15:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Go read the actual record - not the Rush Limbaugh version of it! A majority of Democrats voted against the authorization.

[K0RGR]

Quote[/b] (k4gun @ Oct. 06 2007,07:16)]Language is a virus. According to the New York Times, the President gave &quot;nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.&quot; Do the facts back up this statement? Nope. Its one of those examples of the NYT interjecting its editorial comment into a news story. Did the President authorize the cutting out of eyeballs? Did he authorize connecting testicles to car batteries? Did he authorize the CIA or others to rape the daughters of detainees in front of them? How about beheadings. No he didn't because that would be torture.

So what was authorized? we made them cold and made them think they were going to drown. At no point were their lives in danger, nor were they in danger of permanent scars or afflictions. Head slapping? Please. If a stranger slapped your head in public, you'd be lucky to get a simple assault charge against them. Its not attempted murder nor assault with a deadly weapon. Its a smack.

We're not talking about innocent little darlings here either. We're not even talking about armed robbers. We're talking about men who are captured in the act of attempting to kill soldiers on a battlefield. They are horrible people with nothing but evil in their heart. They are members of a death cult who would do anything possible to cause pain and suffering on a massive scale. They know things that we really need to find out. We are a civilized country so we don't do the things they do, but it can work in our favor for them to think we will. That may not be nice, but its a hell of a lot better than what they would do to us.
Sorry, the United States does not torture.

We've been told so by our President. Now, faced with evidence that they've continued to torture people even after the president told us this (&quot;I did not have sex with that terrorist&quot;), the president has told us again &quot;the United States does not torture&quot;.

But beating and drowning prisoners isn't torture.

Maybe in your country and his, that's true, but in America it isn't.

[w2amr]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 06 2007,13:45)]Quote[/b] (k4gun @ Oct. 06 2007,07:16)]Language is a virus. #According to the New York Times, the President gave &quot;nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.&quot; #Do the facts back up this statement? #Nope. #Its one of those examples of the NYT interjecting its editorial comment into a news story. #Did the President authorize the cutting out of eyeballs? #Did he authorize connecting testicles to car batteries? #Did he authorize the CIA or others to rape the daughters of detainees in front of them? #How about beheadings. #No he didn't because that would be torture.

So what was authorized? #we made them cold and made them think they were going to drown. #At no point were their lives in danger, nor were they in danger of permanent scars or afflictions. #Head slapping? #Please. #If a stranger slapped your head in public, you'd be lucky to get a simple assault charge against them. #Its not attempted murder nor assault with a deadly weapon. #Its a smack. #

We're not talking about innocent little darlings here either. #We're not even talking about armed robbers. #We're talking about men who are captured in the act of attempting to kill soldiers on a battlefield. #They are horrible people with nothing but evil in their heart. #They are members of a death cult who would do anything possible to cause pain and suffering on a massive scale. #They know things that we really need to find out. #We are a civilized country so we don't do the things they do, but it can work in our favor for them to think we will. #That may not be nice, but its a hell of a lot better than what they would do to us.
Sorry, the United States does not torture.

We've been told so by our President. Now, faced with evidence that they've continued to torture people even after the president told us this (&quot;I did not have sex with that terrorist&quot;), the president has told us again &quot;the United States does not torture&quot;.

But beating and drowning prisoners isn't torture.

Maybe in your country and his, #that's true, but in America it isn't.
Soon to come, murder isn't killing.

[K4GUN]

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 06 2007,13:33)]Quote[/b] (k4gun @ Oct. 06 2007,07:16)]So what was authorized? #we made them cold and made them think they were going to drown. #At no point were their lives in danger, nor were they in danger of permanent scars or afflictions. #Head slapping? #Please. #If a stranger slapped your head in public, you'd be lucky to get a simple assault charge against them. #Its not attempted murder nor assault with a deadly weapon. #Its a smack. #
How the hell do you know what is going on over there?
I don't. That what the NYT reported. They reported head &quot;smacking&quot;, water boarding and cold temperatures. Is that torture? If so, what word would you use for slitting the throat of the wife of a political enemy? What word gets used for chopping off fingers? What word describes the act of raping little girls to make their father talk? It sure can't be torture because your definition of torture includes only thing that are uncomfortable but leave no permanent injuries.

Oh and for the record, this &quot;waterboarding&quot; thing is rough. It makes the person feel like they are drowning. From what I've heard, its a horrible feeling. Few people can take more than a few seconds of it without completely panicking. Their brains tell them they are about to die. In reality, they are perfectly safe. They can not die from it. It can not cause any physical damage. Its just very, very uncomfortable. When dealing with the kind of people who commit terrorist acts, its often the only way to get them to break. I'm all for it.

[kg6amw]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 06 2007,13:40)]Quote[/b] (kg6amw @ Oct. 05 2007,15:10)]Many democrats aren't being quite honest about why they've radically changed their views of the war. # Democrats, like most others, wanted Saddam taken out for a variety of reasons beyond fears of weapons of mass destruction. #It was the Clinton-appointed CIA director George Tenet who supplied both Democrats and Republicans in Congress with much of the intelligence they would later cite in deciding to attack Saddam. #When both congressional Democrats and Republicans cast their votes to go along with President Bush, they even crafted 23 formal causes for war. #They now most often plead they were hoodwinked by sneaky warmongering neocons or sexed-up partisan intelligence reports and just want to ran away and hide. #Poor babies, I guess its just too much responsibility to deal with.
Go read the actual record - not the Rush Limbaugh version of it! A majority of Democrats voted against the authorization.
The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107–243 -- joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.), it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133,[2] and the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23.[3] It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16, 2002.