KrustyKidd

If they do then you are unfit to serve on the Supreme Court as those there are supposed to be beyond that rather than admitting they are not. You seem to be missing the part where she shows she is a sexist racist; The part..........

Oh I see the problem. You believe that we should have biased judges who screw things up completely according to their own personal beliefs without regard for equality and the law and then, later on, halfheartedly rectify those errent judgements. Cool. Is this an official policy somewhere which is endorsed by some entity?

By virtue of Presidential directive they were offered the choice of which they preffered - talking or waterboarding. They volunteered for waterboarding, same as the conservative talk show host.

Wrong. Justice is blind. Justicde that is admittedly biased is not blind and is therfore not justice but personal.

You did though. You said.... What he said...... Being half white and half First Nations doesn't influence me in any way when racisim is seen and, that is what she is. Waffle all you want but really, I could be half Arabic and it would change nothing about her statement as I am a sentient human being and can read as well as understand. She is not saying anything of the sort. Read again what she said and translate again if you wish; She hopes that a racial group and gender will reach a better conclusion than a white male. That is racist. I certainly don't hope that Latina women reach better conclusions then Arabic men or women nor do I hope Negro men reach better conclusions then Aborigional women. I hope that all people reach better conclusions regardless of their gender or race. Anybody that hopes that one race and gender does is a racist as well as a sexist as she is by her own admission.

I'm half Aborigional so your theory is out the window. As for my misunderstanding of her words let's take another look shall we? Seems she hopes that a woman who is Latina with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male. Do you get another understanding from your decoder ring than that? BubberMiley Sorry but I didn't explain to you what race or gender I was as it doesn't matter - to me and nor should it to anybody else. To her it certainly does as she seems to feel that her being Hispanic and a woman gives her some sort of devine insight into justice. That is a sign of a racist.

I would say that the hardest part is to actually have somebody to negotiate with that can speak for all. The next is to get them to define exactly what they wish and, what they will provide in return.

How so BubberMiley? Please enlighten us all on what decisions I have made which have been dependent on gender and race. Please show us what the meaning of your comment was and what basis you are using for this personal slander.

The US never unconditionally supported Israel in whatever they did so how is this different? As for Obama's Muslim roots, you have still yet to show them as attending a school as a child hardly qualifies one to be anything other than a kid who attended a school for a few years. In what way is it too complicated? As for drawn out, it is quite the opposite as both Palestinians and Israelis would gain immediate benefits rather than results that took years of benchmarks to achieve before land would be turned over for use. And tell me, why would you believe that getting rent from land usage in an area where tourism would flourish under peaceful conditions would not be an economic boon?

How is it bad for Israel given the US has much to lose as well and, what Islamic roots does Obama have given he is Christian?

She also said this....... What she also said ...... Right and wrong out the window, it all comes down to the color of skin and what equipment you have between your legs. What a pick! In any case, this bigot isn't a swing position at this time so, let Barry have this one and challenge the next one.

They, and the Israelis could be rich beyond their wildest dreams if they only could gel into one cooperative unit. Krusty Kid Peace Plan

Qutbism is hardly likely to become the norm in our society if three Al Qaeda executives are water boarded. Golly, you people with this idiot argument are out to lunch. Oh, has Obama stated that he will not use this technique - ever? From what I understand, his press secretary danced around the question when asked directly.

Gee, hardly torture as he could get up and end it anytime he wished. Same as the three guys that got water boarded. All they had to do was to cooperate.

Israel has not alluded to destroying Iran and never did hence, Iran which has on numerous occasions as well as supporting groups that have that as their cornerstone has now, the means to reach out and actually do it. So, if you believe in being fair, then soon as Iran has a nuke to put on top of those missiles, they will stop being anti Israel. After all, fair is fair.

Waldo And the Iraqi people are free nonetheless Waldo. Mandating through the UN further US help. Waldo And this is the decision of whom? Saddam Hussein or the free Iraqi people through their representatives? Waldo That would be something you should take up with Mr Obama as Bush agrees with you on this one. Waldo That he was - fifty million people are now free to determine their future. Waldo You forgot to mention the opportunity for hundreds of millions of future generations to choose their own destiny. Freedom is never free Waldo. Oleg Bush freed fifty million people Oleg. While he was doing that, less than twenty thousand died. Once those people were free, they killed each other to the number of about a hundred fifty thousand. All that compared with the deaths on Saddam’s shoulders of a million and a half through wars, UN sanctions which he could have averted in a moment and his day to day administering of his country. So, for every person freed (which is what I believe you mean by ‘saved’) which is fifty million, there would have to be a trail of bodies five billion strong according to your math.. Did five billion people (half the population of the earth) die in the last few years in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Move a few missiles onto South Korean and Japanese territory under joint control with scheduled talks for purchasing same by those two countries and see if the Chinese are as happy with Nukes they can't control as they are with ones they can. Course, Obama is probably dong that right now and the golfing was only a cover.

Seaport, spare parts and maintenance facilities for their naval fleets, cooperaton on weapons manufacturing and trials, shared intelligence, securement of the land mass from Jihadist and Soviet influence, a strong economic and cultural bond not shared by most other countries of the world and, certainly none others in the region. The US won't be dropping Israel from it's list of supported nations any time soon, it's too expensive to replace the facilities and, won't go over well with the people here.

I'm not one to mindlessly criticize Obama as some of the stuff he does makes sense but to be out golfing with a low level aide hours after NoKo tests a nuke and a few missiles doesn't seem like a correct response. Japan and South Korea are shitting their pants and he is playing golf. Unless of course, he has taken action by sending the seventh fleet but, I imagine it is a flacid UN condemnation again which as we know means nothing to NoKO. Fore!

Bush united the world in an active campaign against terrorism, freed fifty million people, dealt a crippling blow against Qutbism, forced Saudi Arabia to confront their Qutbists, got Iraq to comply with ceasefire terms after twelve years of being in violation, ended Iraq’s WMD capability and aspirations, proved that America has the will to help allies and destroy foes, pressured other regimes in the area not to provide passive or active support to Jihadists, positioned US troops in the region in force to enable that pressure and finally, enabled the creation of two Arab democracies as an example to others. Fifty million people free today who were in giant gulags prior to his actions. And now, rather than face this humanitarian miracle in celebration, many just try to obscure the achievements by sullying the reasons. I couldn't carre less if it was a bowliing bet he host or, if it had the sound political and strategic motivation that so far as I see, it had. In any case, two countries, fifty million people freed is akin to a miracle. Hail Saint Bush!!!

That would be a severe right wing back lash, something that even I, a right wing type would not wish to see.

Waldo By most I surmise that you mean the suspected terrorists who would stop at noting to portray the US as bad to an international organization as well as the 25% of the US public who view torture as an action that should never be taken. The other 71% and the Congress/Senate and Executive who view it as cool under various circumstances most probably would go along with EI under almost all scenarios (but not torture) so I am not sure whom you mean as ‘most.’

It would be a change to have a relatively unified America after eight years of left wing rabid division despite the flip flopping Obama has done on so many issues. One can only hope that he figures out how to realize reality prior to making changes and then, weakening his equity in front of the international community when he finds out (as in Gitmo etc) that they are only pie in the sky fantasy and comes off as an idiot. Myself, I would support him. He's rational and has good intentions however, needs to think his changes through prior to 'proclaiming' them as reality.

It is your responsibility to prove that Bush lied so, where was the continual staunch opposition or even rather than meek (if any) opposition then? I have no idea. I referred that to you to show the links to prove that the committees were briefed. And the third time I will say that Bush is in no way obliged to act on their recommendations as that is all they are. Opinions. See Waldo, Bush makes the directives from advice and recommendations he receives from a variety of sources, not the other way around. Oh ok. So in other words, everybody else on the committees were briefed and had no problem with it except Rockefeller, who didn’t even bother getting himself up to speed for briefings he, as the Vice Chair, in any scenario certainly would have be it by reading the minutes, having a representative attend (as Pelosi did on one occasion) or, simply had a private meeting with the CIA.. How strange seeing as how neither admits to being in a briefing to even see what the details were. CIA Cheif Says Pelosi Briefed Fully Leon Panetta Sure it did. It was always there as Bush makes the directives, not the OLC as it is only one source of advice hence, legal or not, once the President made the directive it was policy until challenged and brought to the floor in some manner for a vote.. To tell; the truth I’m against torture however, like Congress, the Senate, the President and the bulk of his staff as well as 71% of the Public am for accelerated interrogation techniques which leaves the level of interrogation used in the hands the person who is being questioned via their cooperation. As for outright torture itself, more than 70% of the people in the US say ‘sure’ without even batting an eye.. Waldo, this portion of the discussion isn‘t about when, where or how Congress and the Senate Intelligence Committees were informed but rather their approval or at the very least, approval through virtual lack of any strong opposition of it once they were - whenever that was as long as it was before Bush made the staement that you refer to as a lie in 2005. Hardly., most thinking Americans believe that this action is ok with them. Actually, according to PEW, 71% to some degree or another. With support like that, I imagine Enhanced Interrogations are a shoe in as well. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press Views About Torture Remain Evenly Split Don’t have to as the ‘International’ part of the Red Crosses title gives it away as a non American entity which is hardly inclusive to inter American policies which is what we are discussing now. The fact that you have taken international entities charges of ‘alleged’ crimes as well as the certainly biased testimony of probable terrorists (of which all is suspect as their intent is to harm the US in any way they can including slander) above the Congress, Senate, President and most of the American public. This shows your bias in this matter and, inability to close your mind to any other possibility other than Bush being wrong. Obviously you believe terrorists and enemy combatants. Heck, the west is evil and Qutbism is good right? The onus on proving Bush a liar is not on me to defend but rather on you to prosecute. You have alleged evidence of a missing tape, foreign red Cross and terrorist suspects charging they were tortured. We have the Congress and Senate going along with these actions being classified as enhanced interrogation as well as the bulk of American society. Of course, this is relative as anybody being subjected to any form of interrogation would consider it torture to some degree (getting a bill in the mail is a form of torture to some) however, those enacting the action pick and choose what it is and, in this case, they chose not to intend it as torture but rather ’enhanced interrogation.’ Now, when Bush stated the US did not torture, did he believe, given the support of Congress, the Senate and his advisors that enhanced interrogation was interrogation or torture?

Nope but I said the the Congressional Intelligence Committee oks the funding tf the CIA and it's programs. Thus, in the briefings detailing the enhanced interrogation techniques they continued to fund it without restrictions and so, essentially agreed that the interrogations were not torture but rather 'enhanced interrogations.' He is on tenuous ground saying he was not briefed as everybody else on those committees were according to records linked to this article. As for due process and the issue there was a presidential directive that was in force and, through Congressional and Senate approval trough the continued funding and support of same by the Senate and Congress Intelligence Committees gave support to the President to continue if necessary despite the withdrawing of legal support. Is it? He is allowed to do whatever he needs to in order to protect the USA and so, did just that and enacted a directive which allowed him to do that. One that was approved through support by Congress and the Senate via their Intelligence Committees. Sure. The President of the US has a directive saying that they can carry out enhanced interrogations and he publicly said that the US does not torture despite the Red Cross saying there may be 'alleged' cases of torture. So, who are you going to believe Waldo - the President with directives and the support of Congress and the Senate or, allegations from the Red Cross and perpetrators of 911?