Flying Monkeys
By Nobody
11 Mar 2011 1:42 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
14 Dec 2014 8:13 pm
Oh, okay, the CIA should have taken months if not years seeking outside legal advice and let the country be attacked again and thousands more killed.Misty » 14 Dec 2014 8:04 pm » wrote:
You mean by John Yoo and Jay Bybee the two clowns that BushCo. shopped around for to write those ridiculous torture memos? Give me a **** break.
There, happy, moonbat?
But the point is, CIA operatives acted within that directive to protect the country.
Got that? Protect the country.
Which is also true, but doesn't refute Rodriguez's stated reason. If I recall, he also alluded on Fox to protecting the CIA's reputation.
That's not what the deputy to Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, then executive director of the CIA said. He wrote in an e-mail that Rodriguez thought “the heat from destroying is nothing compared with what it would be if the tapes ever got into public domain—he said that out of context they would make us look terrible; it would be ‘devastating’ to us.”
So? That's not a concern?
Are you stupid?
14 Dec 2014 8:13 pm
Still asking why Eric Holder hasn't prosecuted. ANYONE.Misty » 14 Dec 2014 8:04 pm » wrote:You mean by John Yoo and Jay Bybee the two clowns that BushCo. shopped around for to write those ridiculous torture memos? Give me a **** break.
Those memos were widely condemned by many jurists, and in fact most career attorneys in the Justice, Defense and State Departments strongly opposed the positions taken in the memos but were overruled by senior political appointees.
14 Dec 2014 8:17 pm
Yup, they bent the rules in order to protect the country, just like FDR stomped on the Constitution when he locked up 10's of thousands of innocent Japanese Americans.Misty » 14 Dec 2014 8:04 pm » wrote:
You mean by John Yoo and Jay Bybee the two clowns that BushCo. shopped around for to write those ridiculous torture memos? Give me a **** break.
Those memos were widely condemned by many jurists, and in fact most career attorneys in the Justice, Defense and State Departments strongly opposed the positions taken in the memos but were overruled by senior political appointees.
But you moonbats always give him a free pass. It's only when conservatives tip toe across the line that you take out the blackjacks.
So go f*** yourself and your endless partisan lies and bulls***.
14 Dec 2014 8:52 pm
I answered that in another thread.golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 8:13 pm » wrote: Still asking why Eric Holder hasn't prosecuted. ANYONE.
14 Dec 2014 9:00 pm
No one agreed that was the right thing to do. It was a mistake and President Reagan signed legislation that provided for payments and apologies to Japanese-Americans who were forcibly relocated during World War II.RichClem » 14 Dec 2014 8:17 pm » wrote:Yup, they bent the rules in order to protect the country, just like FDR stomped on the Constitution when he locked up 10's of thousands of innocent Japanese Americans. But you moonbats always give him a free pass.
This country is not perfect. We have made mistakes, and when we do we need to own up to them.
14 Dec 2014 9:10 pm
Hey Clem! Your BFF and tag team partner is actually trying to convince people that I think that it was the Republicans who passed the Affordable Care Act in 2009.
No, seriously he is.
Did I ever say that it was passed by Republicans?
No, seriously he is.
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:38 pm » wrote:You thought Republicans negotiated and passed Obamacare.
You and I have debated the ACA many times Kitten.golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:54 pm » wrote:You claimed the Republicans negotiated and passed the ACA. They did not.
Did I ever say that it was passed by Republicans?
14 Dec 2014 9:56 pm
How A Troll Operates
From a discussion in Golfboy's thread about the Cromnibus bill in which he was trying to assert that Democrats were not against the rider in the bill that loosened regulations on derivatives and that they were in fact the ones who were responsible for it getting into the bill.
This is what happened when I tried to turn the tables on him by using his own twisted logic against him.
Remember this whole thread was about the budget bill that passed the House three days ago.
From a discussion in Golfboy's thread about the Cromnibus bill in which he was trying to assert that Democrats were not against the rider in the bill that loosened regulations on derivatives and that they were in fact the ones who were responsible for it getting into the bill.
This is what happened when I tried to turn the tables on him by using his own twisted logic against him.
Remember this whole thread was about the budget bill that passed the House three days ago.
Misty » 13 Dec 2014 3:59 pm » wrote:They (Democrats) opposed the rider that would change a provision of the Dodd Frank Act. You do know what oppose means don't you genius? It means they were against it.
golfboy » 13 Dec 2014 5:17 pm » wrote:They weren't against it, they negotiated it into the bill, and voted for it. You have a very strange definition of being against something.
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 5:21 pm » wrote:And Republicans negotiated the funding of the ACA into the bill and they voted for it so that means they weren't against it.
How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot?
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:22 pm » wrote:They were locked out of the negotiations, and not ONE of them voted for it.
*******.
It's amazing how little the left knows about their own laws.
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 5:26 pm » wrote:Before you start calling people Dumbasses, you'd better make sure you know what you're talking about.
I'm not talking about the original law genius. I'm talking about the funding for the ACA in the budget bill that just passed.
*******!
There is money in the budget to fund the ACA through next September, so Republicans negotiated that into the bill and they voted to pass it.
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 5:30 pm » wrote:And Republicans negotiated funding for the ACA into the bill and they passed it by voting for it, so that means they are for the ACA now.
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:32 pm » wrote:Republicans were locked out of the negotiations, and not ONE of them voted for it.
.
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 5:36 pm » wrote:My error? Now I know that you are not only a filthy liar, but you are also off your **** nut.
I was talking about the funding for the ACA through next year that is in the Cromnibus bill that just passed, NOT the original passage of the Affordable Care Act.
Are you going to tell me that not one Republican voted for the budget bill?
You are the self-appointed expert on everything, but you didn't seem to know that the budget bill that just passed includes funding for the ACA.
My error........
Jackass.
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:38 pm » wrote:Yea, you're error. You thought Republicans negotiated and passed Obamacare.
It's amazing how ignorant the left is about their own actions.
And when I corrected your stupidity, you came back with "Oh, I wasn't talking about THAT law".
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 5:43 pm » wrote:Yeah, you go with that **** Golfboy.
Try and convince anyone that I thought that Republicans negotiated and passed Obamacare. Let me know how far you get with that whopper.
Even your BFF and tag team partner Clem wouldn't say something that boneheaded.
In case you forgot, this whole thread which YOU started is about the passage of the budget bill, NOT the passage of the ACA.
But thanks for the laugh anyway.
BTW, I may not be as smart as you, but I do know the difference between 'you're' and 'your'.
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 5:54 pm » wrote:Oh wow, now you're trying to distract from your face plant over a TYPO.
You claimed the Republicans negotiated and passed the ACA. They did not.
Now run away and hide. It's what you do best.
15 Dec 2014 2:48 pm
Turns out Golfboy doesn't like my siggy. He claims that he was not suggesting that I rectally force feed my kids.
golfboy » 12 Dec 2014 6:41 pm » wrote:Welcome to debate, Misty style. She can't debate what you actually say, so purposely misstates your position and then argues against it.
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 3:19 pm » wrote:That's pretty funny coming from the King of mischaracterization. There is no one here on this forum who mischaracterizes, mistates, and just plain lies about what people have actually said, more than you.
golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 3:27 pm » wrote:That's pretty hilarious coming from you. Have you read your own signature which purposely misstates, and plain lies about what I said?
Misty » 14 Dec 2014 4:05 pm » wrote:Are you denying that you suggested that I rectally force feed my kids? Here's the original quote. Anyone can link back to it. The only thing I changed was the misspelling of the word 'they' because you left off the Y.
What do you think? Was he implying that I rectally force feed my kids or not?golfboy » 14 Dec 2014 4:11 pm » wrote:Yes, I deny it, because it's a lie. I'm not responsible for what you believe I "suggest". I merely said I pity your children because you believe that it's an entertaining activity to rectally feed someone. You made up the rest.
15 Dec 2014 9:13 pm
Senator Cruz's fellow Republicans are starting to turn on him.Ted Cruz Gave Obama An Early Christmas Gift Over The Weekend
Over the weekend Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) went to battle with Democrats, but his gambit backfired and ironically gave Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and President Barack Obama an unexpected Christmas gift.
It began on Friday evening, when Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) were close to securing an agreement to quickly vote on the $1.1 trillion "CRomnibus" spending bill to avert a government shutdown. Cruz, along with Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), blindsided Republican leaders by objecting and dragging out the process as they demanded a vote to defund Obama's executive actions on immigration.
What Cruz didn't count on was Reid instead seizing on the occasion — which forced the Senate to stay in session for procedural votes — to move forward with starting the confirmation vote clock on a whopping 24 Obama nominations that otherwise might have been jettisoned. The Texan's tactic angered numerous Republican colleagues.
"I think most Republicans think that Christmas came early for Democrats," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said, according to Roll Call, blaming Cruz. "I haven't seen Harry smile this much in years, and I didn't particularly like it."
Twelve of the nominations are for federal districts courts, an unusually high number to confirm in a lame duck session and a big boost to Obama's judicial legacy. At least two prominent executive branch nominees face GOP opposition: Vivek Murthy for surgeon general (whom the National Rifle Association has been working to block) and Tony Blinken for deputy secretary of state. The confirmation votes will start Monday.
On Saturday night, Cruz dropped his objections and allowed a vote on the funding bill, which passed 56-40 just hours ahead of a potential government shutdown — after Reid had already pushed forward with the nominations. Cruz raised a "constitutional point of order" order against the spending bill over Obama's immigration actions, which all Democrats and 22 Republicans — including McConnell — voted down.
"Senator Cruz's stunt got two fewer votes than the twenty-four Obama nominees he helped Senate Democrats advance tonight," Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson mocked.
Cruz's supporters dismiss GOP attacks on his tactics, arguing that he ceded nothing because Reid would have called back the Senate anyway to vote on nominations.
That's possible — Democratic leaders had wanted to move nominations in the lame duck — but if the spending bill had finished early, they would have had a hard time persuading members to cut short their holidays and stay in Washington to vote on nominations.
So they gleefully pinned it on Cruz.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStor ... s-27587403
15 Dec 2014 10:03 pm
I'm afraid that Golfboy has lost his mind.
golfboy » 15 Dec 2014 4:19 pm » wrote: They did. Clearly. We were fine until Democrats took control of the House and Senate.
Misty » 15 Dec 2014 9:02 pm » wrote:Which bills passed by the House after January 2007 and signed into law by George W. Bush caused the financial collapse? Name one. (Not holding my breath.)
golfboy » 15 Dec 2014 9:41 pm » wrote:All of them. Every one that Nancy Pelosi brought to the floor and passed, like this one:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/10/news/ec ... imum_wage/
Misty » 15 Dec 2014 9:54 pm » wrote:Now that I have picked myself up off the floor, let me ask you something.
You are seriously saying that a bill passed in January 2007 to raise the minimum wage $2.10 in three steps over three years is what caused the financial meltdown in 2008.
Is that right? You really want to go with that?
I think there is either something very wrong with you, or this has to be a joke.
Please tell me that it's a joke, because no one could possibly be that stupid, so if it's not a joke the only other option would be that you have completely lost your mind.
16 Dec 2014 8:47 am
FDR did it, and no one was threatened with prosecution or impeachment, because anyone with common sense knows that a president will cross lines to protect the country.Misty » 14 Dec 2014 9:00 pm » wrote: No one agreed that was the right thing to do.
And that when peace comes, policy goes back to Constitutional and legal norms.
Did anyone shriek about war crimes and demand prosecution, like today's liberal left is doing?It was a mistake and President Reagan signed legislation that provided for payments and apologies to Japanese-Americans who were forcibly relocated during World War II.
This country is not perfect. We have made mistakes, and when we do we need to own up to them.
Did they vilify the public figures who with good intent to protect the country crossed lines?
Not that I've ever read.
Liberals are an ugly, irrational mob.
16 Dec 2014 10:24 am
Did FDR torture people?RichClem » 16 Dec 2014 8:47 am » wrote:Did anyone shriek about war crimes and demand prosecution, like today's liberal left is doing?
President Jimmy Carter opened an investigation to determine whether the decision to put Japanese Americans into internment camps had been justified by the government.
And in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Civil Liberties Act, which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government and authorized a payment of $20,000 to each individual camp survivor.
Today the decision by FDR to intern the Japanese is looked upon as a blemish on his record, just like BushCo.'s decision to torture people will be.
16 Dec 2014 11:12 am
So that means it was ok and considered proper AT THE TIME?Misty » 16 Dec 2014 10:24 am » wrote:Did FDR torture people?
President Jimmy Carter opened an investigation to determine whether the decision to put Japanese Americans into internment camps had been justified by the government.
And in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Civil Liberties Act, which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government and authorized a payment of $20,000 to each individual camp survivor.
Today the decision by FDR to intern the Japanese is looked upon as a blemish on his record, just like BushCo.'s decision to torture people will be.
People loved FDR and only through the prism of time and CHANGED sensitivities was he considered an asshole on his issue.
Thank you for the clarification.
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
16 Dec 2014 11:15 am
It was not okay at the time or ever. Just like torture was not okay after 9/11 or ever.deezer shoove » 16 Dec 2014 11:12 am » wrote: So that means it was ok and considered proper AT THE TIME?
People loved FDR and only through the prism of time and CHANGED sensitivities was he considered an asshole on his issue.
Thank you for the clarification.
16 Dec 2014 12:28 pm
There was absolutely no reason to imprison Japanese Americans; not even a bit of evidence.Misty » 16 Dec 2014 10:24 am » wrote: Did FDR torture people?
President Jimmy Carter opened an investigation to determine whether the decision to put Japanese Americans into internment camps had been justified by the government.
And in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Civil Liberties Act, which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government and authorized a payment of $20,000 to each individual camp survivor.
Today the decision by FDR to intern the Japanese is looked upon as a blemish on his record, just like BushCo.'s decision to torture people will be.
We got mountains of intel from waterboarding and harsh interrogations, and as high CIA officials stated, thousands of lives were saved.
Further, even worse torture happened under Clinton and likely Obama, by outsourcing it to countries where the practices are far, far worse and more widespread.
Didn't hear a peep out of you about that.
So take your self righteous bleating and stick it.
16 Dec 2014 12:31 pm
Fox News' Elisabeth Hasselbeck Uses Sydney Hostage Crisis To Defend Torture
They are called lone-wolves, because they act alone, so no one else can give up their identity.
2. The gunman in Australia had nothing to do with ISIS.
The hostage-taker had said he that he wanted to be recognized as a member of ISIS.
And I want to be recognized as a member of Mensa, but it won't happen.
1. There is nothing torture would have done to stop lone-wolf attacks like the one in Sydney.During FOX News' coverage of an Iranian-born gunman holding 17 men and women hostage at a cafe in Sydney Monday, "Fox & Friends" co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck used the crisis to defend the CIA and bash the Senate Intelligence Committee's recently-released report on the agency's interrogation techniques.
"Meanwhile, the actual individuals here at home who have been looking into and trying to stop attacks like this and perhaps future hostage situations, as we are still at war indeed with ISIS and terrorism, are the CIA, and they have been painted as the bad guys at home,” Hasselbeck said, as images from the scene in Syndey -- accompanied by the words "terror down under" -- flashed across the screen.
After showing a clip of former Vice President Dick Cheney battling NBC News' Chuck Todd on waterboarding during Sunday's "Meet the Press," Hasselbeck continued to find parallels between the situation in Sydney and the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
“When you see what’s happening in Australia, today, right now, in a chocolate shop, and you understand the real war with ISIS that we’re in, and the sharp contrast with the accusations of the CIA really just trying to do their job and keep America safe for the past 13 years, startles you, any day,” she said.
Video
They are called lone-wolves, because they act alone, so no one else can give up their identity.
2. The gunman in Australia had nothing to do with ISIS.
The hostage-taker had said he that he wanted to be recognized as a member of ISIS.
And I want to be recognized as a member of Mensa, but it won't happen.
16 Dec 2014 12:35 pm
Misty » 16 Dec 2014 11:15 am » wrote:It was not okay at the time or ever. Just like torture was not okay after 9/11 or ever.
Its a good thing the intel community looked at what legally constituted torture and did not authorize anything that crossed that line! We would have egg on our faces now.
16 Dec 2014 12:45 pm
The CIA's own internal documents which were the basis of the Senate report said otherwise.RichClem » 16 Dec 2014 12:28 pm » wrote:We got mountains of intel from waterboarding and harsh interrogations, and as high CIA officials stated, thousands of lives were saved.
And CIA director John Brennan said it was “unknowable” if the agency’s enhanced-interrogation techniques torture provided any crucial intelligence.
UNKNOWABLE: not able to be known
I guess you think that you know the unknowable.
16 Dec 2014 12:48 pm
Those torture memos written by Jay Bybee and John Yoo, have been widely discredited. Just because those two clowns said that torture was legal, doesn't make it so.NeoConvict » 16 Dec 2014 12:35 pm » wrote: Its a good thing the intel community looked at what legally constituted torture and did not authorize anything that crossed that line! We would have egg on our faces now.
16 Dec 2014 1:12 pm
The fact remains the issue of torture was considered. Reasonable efforts were made to stay on the right side of the issue and stop short of torture. Using outliers like people unintenrionally dying from exposure do not make this program torture, it indicates there were some unfortunate occurances while prisoners were being questioned. As these deaths were not delibrate they were likely investigated and corrective measures put in place to mitigate them in the future.Misty » 16 Dec 2014 12:48 pm » wrote: Those torture memos written by Jay Bybee and John Yoo, have been widely discredited. Just because those two clowns said that torture was legal, doesn't make it so.
No torture was conducted.
Who is online
In total there are 5627 users online :: 6 registered, 16 bots, and 5605 guests
Bots: MicroMessenger, ADmantX, proximic, Mediatoolkitbot, facebookexternalhit, LCC, CriteoBot, YandexBot, Mediapartners-Google, Firefox/7.0, Applebot, Googlebot, curl/7, Baiduspider, bingbot, GPTBot