The_Squid

Eventually, I would imagine some Hague court dates... but no consequences yet... as per the lawyer's article I cited earlier.

I'm not sure that's even a factor. Whether it works or not, the USA has signed onto multiple treaties and torture is illegal, regardless of the effectiveness. Although, arguing it's effectiveness is a total lie, given all the evidence to the contrary.

And you have a "feeling" it works, so you think it works. What works better.... your feelings on a subject, or looking at what experts say about it?

Stating this over and over doesn't make it fact. Please elaborate.

The author criticized Bush for torture and scathingly ripped Obama for not upholding his oath of office and the law. I think this person is coming at it from a very balanced viewpoint arguing points of actual law. You, on the other hand, have no references or evidence supporting your position... it seems to be "screw the law... screw results... torturing Muslims who we think are terrorists feels good and I saw it work on the show 24."

Is Trudeau supposed to not ever see his lifelong friends? What if family is "lobbying" him too... maybe he and Sophie should live apart while he is PM in case she "lobbies" him to spay and neuter pets, or whatever she's into. This is getting stupid... And DoP actually he believes he's a Muslim plant ... or a secret Muslim... bent on destroying Canadian civilization. I must say, that's a rather bizarre point of view / claim.

Here is a great article chronicling the recent torture history, the lack of enforcement and the fact that torture doesn't produce the results that the right-wing torture fans like to think it does ("alternative facts" again). http://www.globalresearch.ca/state-sanctioned-torture-in-the-age-of-trump/5570897

Cite for this please...

Sure... torture people.... but don't whine about your prisoners being tortured, because now it's perfectly acceptable. There is no more high horse to stand on.... torture their prisoners? Well, i guess it's OK to kill your families then... The west is better than that, for the most part.... except for America... and right wingers on this forum...

Are there no Mods on this site who could make a suggestion, or at least say "there's nothing that can be done"? Isn't that why there's a "Support" section?

I know you didn't. I was responding to bcsapper. Debating abortion policy and debating how many people were at the inauguration are not the same thing. One has room for debate on ethics, morals and science... the other is simply a factual matter where one side backs their claims up by lies. However, if one were to say "cuz God" in the abortion debate, then they move into the same type of debate.

and some say all Muslims are going to kill you... I think some of your examples have some room for debate. Like this one. There are actual reasonable positions against abortion and/or suicide... and then there are the religious nuts who can be dismissed immediately. But this comparison, and others in your post, are not very good. These aren't the same as believing Breitbart is a good source for the truth.

Trump’s first job approval rating is the lowest for any new president FIRST JOB APPROVAL RATINGS YEAR PRESIDENT APPROVE DISAPPROVE NET APPROVAL 1945 Harry Truman 87% 3% +84 1963 Lyndon Johnson 78 2 +76 1974 Gerald Ford 71 3 +68 1961 John Kennedy 72 6 +66 1953 Dwight Eisenhower 68 7 +61 1977 Jimmy Carter 66 8 +58 2009 Barack Obama 68 12 +56 1969 Richard Nixon 59 5 +54 1989 George H.W. Bush 51 6 +45 1993 Bill Clinton 58 20 +38 1981 Ronald Reagan 55 18 +37 2001 George W. Bush 57 25 +32 2017 Donald Trump 45 45 0 SOURCE: GALLUP https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/3-days-into-trumps-presidency-45-percent-of-americans-disapprove-of-his-performance/ Lowest approval, highest disapproval.... An entertaining start to the presidency!!

Equating sexual assault to accidentally bumping someone... brilliant stuff. Truly Trumpian fashion!

So you're of the opinion that we will discover that reconciliation with indigenous people was a bad idea and change the name of it to "Segregation Bridge" or something?

You're assuming honest answers and not just posting for the sake of being a "devil's advocate", or something like that....

What about the ones who are on this website who don't seem to be poor or uneducated?

Perfect person to be in charge... lol Great leadership qualities ("I grab them by the pussy!")... and amazing business acumen (see $20M paid for lawsuit against Trump Univ.)

Calgary will be renaming a bridge because the person it's named for was a key person in establishing the residential school system. The bridge is being renamed "Reconciliation Bridge". Is this a good thing? Is it too "PC"? Should we erase the names of founders from landmarks if they were also responsible for some terrible actions? Where do we draw the line? http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/reconciliation-bridge-langevin-residential-schools-indigenous-calgary-council-1.3942534 http://www.cbc.ca/radio/the180/why-men-are-dying-of-drug-overdoses-condos-are-tiny-houses-and-conflict-of-interest-1.3942875/bridges-of-reconciliation-literally-1.3944969