New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Darth Cheney: 25% of our torture victims were innocent? Who cares?

Bugsy McGurk

President
Tough noogies, says Darth...

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you, what do you say to Gul Rahman, what do you say to Sulaiman Abdula, what do you say to Khalid al-Masri? All three of these folks were detained, they had these interrogation techniques used on them. They eventually were found to be innocent. They were released, no apologies, nothing. What do we owe them?
DICK CHENEY: Well--
CHUCK TODD: I mean, let me go to Gul Rahman. He was chained to the wall of his cell, doused with water, froze to death in C.I.A. custody. And it turned out it was a case of mistaken identity.
DICK CHENEY: --right. But the problem I had is with the folks that we did release that end up back on the battlefield. Of the 600 and some people who were released out of Guantanamo, 30% roughly ended up back on the battlefield. Today we're very concerned about ISIS. Terrible new terrorist organization.
It is headed by named Baghdadi. Baghdadi was in the custody of the U.S. military in Iraq in Camp Bucca. He was let go and now he's out leading the terror attack against the United States. I'm more concerned with bad guys who got out and released than I am with a few that, in fact, were innocent.
CHUCK TODD: 25% of the detainees though, 25% turned out to be innocent. They were released.
DICK CHENEY: Where are you going to draw the line, Chuck? How are--
CHUCK TODD: Well, I'm asking you.
DICK CHENEY: --you going to know?
(OVERTALK)
CHUCK TODD: Is that too high? You're okay with that margin for error?
DICK CHENEY: I have no problem as long as we achieve our objective. And our objective is to get the guys who did 9/11 and it is to avoid another attack against the United States. I was prepared and we did. We got authorizing from the president and authorization from the Justice Department to go forward with the program. It worked. It worked now for 13 years.
We've avoided another mass casualty attack against the United States. And we did capture Bin Laden. We did capture an awful lot of the senior guys at Al Qaeda who were responsible for that attack on 9/11. I'd do it again in a minute.




Hey Darth...about "we did capture Bin Laden"....First, we killed him, not captured him. Second, who's "we"? You and GWB FAILED to nail him, lest we forget.

;-)
 

Saladin2

Senator
Supporting Member
Cheney is a War Criminal...Should be put on trial and then put in prison...Maybe get his old white ass beat from time to time
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Cheney is a War Criminal...Should be put on trial and then put in prison...Maybe get his old white ass beat from time to time
He doesn't have the balls to simply admit that we tortured people.

He proved he was a weasel when he got 5 deferments during the Vietnam War, and he's still a weasel.

The leader of the GOP chickenhawks.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
Tough noogies, says Darth...

CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you, what do you say to Gul Rahman, what do you say to Sulaiman Abdula, what do you say to Khalid al-Masri? All three of these folks were detained, they had these interrogation techniques used on them. They eventually were found to be innocent. They were released, no apologies, nothing. What do we owe them?
DICK CHENEY: Well--
CHUCK TODD: I mean, let me go to Gul Rahman. He was chained to the wall of his cell, doused with water, froze to death in C.I.A. custody. And it turned out it was a case of mistaken identity.
DICK CHENEY: --right. But the problem I had is with the folks that we did release that end up back on the battlefield. Of the 600 and some people who were released out of Guantanamo, 30% roughly ended up back on the battlefield. Today we're very concerned about ISIS. Terrible new terrorist organization.
It is headed by named Baghdadi. Baghdadi was in the custody of the U.S. military in Iraq in Camp Bucca. He was let go and now he's out leading the terror attack against the United States. I'm more concerned with bad guys who got out and released than I am with a few that, in fact, were innocent.
CHUCK TODD: 25% of the detainees though, 25% turned out to be innocent. They were released.
DICK CHENEY: Where are you going to draw the line, Chuck? How are--
CHUCK TODD: Well, I'm asking you.
DICK CHENEY: --you going to know?
(OVERTALK)
CHUCK TODD: Is that too high? You're okay with that margin for error?
DICK CHENEY: I have no problem as long as we achieve our objective. And our objective is to get the guys who did 9/11 and it is to avoid another attack against the United States. I was prepared and we did. We got authorizing from the president and authorization from the Justice Department to go forward with the program. It worked. It worked now for 13 years.
We've avoided another mass casualty attack against the United States. And we did capture Bin Laden. We did capture an awful lot of the senior guys at Al Qaeda who were responsible for that attack on 9/11. I'd do it again in a minute.




Hey Darth...about "we did capture Bin Laden"....First, we killed him, not captured him. Second, who's "we"? You and GWB FAILED to nail him, lest we forget.

;-)
MORE THAN 50% of drone strikes innocent.

Liberals say: So what?

Nothing could more properly define the level of insanity and political hate than this topic:

The U.S. drone program under President Barack Obama reached its fifth anniversary on Thursday having tallied up an estimated death toll of at least 2,400 people.
As the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a U.K.-based non-profit, details on its website, five years ago the CIA conducted the first drone strikes of the Obama presidency. Although there were reports of suspected "militants" killed, at least 14 civilians also died that day.
After those initial mistakes, TBIJ notes, Obama rapidly ramped up the drone program in Pakistan and increased its use in Yemen and Somalia, two countries where al Qaeda affiliates expanded their presence during Obama's presidency.
Obama recently told The New Yorker that he "wrestle" with civilian casualties. But, he said, he has "a solemn duty and responsibility to keep the American people safe. That’s my most important obligation as President and Commander-in-Chief. And there are individuals and groups out there that are intent on killing Americans -- killing American civilians, killing American children, blowing up American planes."

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International issued a pair of reports in October fiercely criticizing the secrecy that shrouds the administration's drone program, and calling for investigations into the deaths of drone victims with no apparent connection to terrorism. In Pakistan alone, TBIJ estimates, between 416 and 951 civilians, including 168 to 200 children, have been killed.
Critics of the drone program generally acknowledge that most of the people killed in Pakistan were likely members of terrorist groups. But that has not pleased Pakistanis: Hakimullah Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban leader, was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of civilians, but his death by drone in November prompted a wave of popular outrage over the incursion on national sovereignty.
The administration cut the number of drone strikes in Pakistan considerably after a May 2012 speech in which Obama promised tighter rules and greater transparency for the program. But America's drones keep flying. A December strike in Yemen -- reportedly conducted by the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command, not the CIA -- killed 12 civilians.
The drone war is under increasing scrutiny in the U.S. and abroad. A September U.N. report warned that drone warfare has the potential to greatly undermine global stability. And in October, for the first time, Congress heard firsthand accounts from the victims of an apparently botched drone strike.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/obama-drone-program-anniversary_n_4654825.html
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
MORE THAN 50% of drone strikes innocent.

Liberals say: So what?

Nothing could more properly define the level of insanity and political hate than this topic:

The U.S. drone program under President Barack Obama reached its fifth anniversary on Thursday having tallied up an estimated death toll of at least 2,400 people.
As the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a U.K.-based non-profit, details on its website, five years ago the CIA conducted the first drone strikes of the Obama presidency. Although there were reports of suspected "militants" killed, at least 14 civilians also died that day.
After those initial mistakes, TBIJ notes, Obama rapidly ramped up the drone program in Pakistan and increased its use in Yemen and Somalia, two countries where al Qaeda affiliates expanded their presence during Obama's presidency.
Obama recently told The New Yorker that he "wrestle" with civilian casualties. But, he said, he has "a solemn duty and responsibility to keep the American people safe. That’s my most important obligation as President and Commander-in-Chief. And there are individuals and groups out there that are intent on killing Americans -- killing American civilians, killing American children, blowing up American planes."

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International issued a pair of reports in October fiercely criticizing the secrecy that shrouds the administration's drone program, and calling for investigations into the deaths of drone victims with no apparent connection to terrorism. In Pakistan alone, TBIJ estimates, between 416 and 951 civilians, including 168 to 200 children, have been killed.
Critics of the drone program generally acknowledge that most of the people killed in Pakistan were likely members of terrorist groups. But that has not pleased Pakistanis: Hakimullah Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban leader, was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of civilians, but his death by drone in November prompted a wave of popular outrage over the incursion on national sovereignty.
The administration cut the number of drone strikes in Pakistan considerably after a May 2012 speech in which Obama promised tighter rules and greater transparency for the program. But America's drones keep flying. A December strike in Yemen -- reportedly conducted by the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command, not the CIA -- killed 12 civilians.
The drone war is under increasing scrutiny in the U.S. and abroad. A September U.N. report warned that drone warfare has the potential to greatly undermine global stability. And in October, for the first time, Congress heard firsthand accounts from the victims of an apparently botched drone strike.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/obama-drone-program-anniversary_n_4654825.html
[URL='http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/obama-drone-program-anniversary_n_4654825.html[/QUOTE'][/QUOTE][/URL]


;-)


The message from Fox Noise and el Rushbo has been sent forth - never talk about the GWB torture regime. Immediately try to change the subject. By all means, avoid any honest discussion of any issues.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
It matters what an insane person uses as his excuse for this.

In this war against terrorists, you think it's WRONG to torture the men we captured on the battlefield, but it's OK to kill innocent people in far far more numbers??

You realize how INSANE that makes you?
 
Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Pelosi, Hilary, .... all deserve the hang man's noose for war crimes. So does Obama and his drone program operators.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
It matters what an insane person uses as his excuse for this.

In this war against terrorists, you think it's WRONG to torture the men we captured on the battlefield, but it's OK to kill innocent people in far far more numbers??

You realize how INSANE that makes you?
As you know, bombings of one's enemies has always been considered legit warfare, and torture of one's enemies (or, worse yet, those mistaken for enemies) has always been considered a war crime.

In a desperate bid to avoid discussion of your cult heroes' torture regime, you try to compare legit warfare with war crimes. Sane people cannot do that.

Your dodging and digression aside, any comment on Darth's comments in the TP?
 

UPNYA2

Mayor

You are so right, buggy........................ Here;

"25% of the detainees though, 25% turned out to be innocent. They were released."

That is acceptable to me. You?

50% of drone strikes innocents.

100% of the innocents killed, are STILL DEAD! Can't be "released"......

So, what does salon.com, MSMBC, Pravada or any of the other masters of you di m/li bby mouthpieces tell you to say when this subject comes up in "any honest discussion of any issues"?

(Notice the "s" on the end of the word, "issues", buggy, that means the word YOU used was plural, as in "any honest discussion of ANY NUMBER OF issues, not JUST the one involving Bush.......)


So, care to give it a go, hoss, or as I personally suspect, will you once again opt to call someone names then run off to lick your wounds/self?
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
You are so right, buggy........................ Here;

"25% of the detainees though, 25% turned out to be innocent. They were released."

That is acceptable to me. You?

50% of drone strikes innocents.

100% of the innocents killed, are STILL DEAD! Can't be "released"......

So, what does salon.com, MSMBC, Pravada or any of the other masters of you di m/li bby mouthpieces tell you to say when this subject comes up in "any honest discussion of any issues"?

(Notice the "s" on the end of the word, "issues", buggy, that means the word YOU used was plural, as in "any honest discussion of ANY NUMBER OF issues, not JUST the one involving Bush.......)


So, care to give it a go, hoss, or as I personally suspect, will you once again opt to call someone names then run off to lick your wounds/self?
It's truly amazing how obedient all you GOP droids are.

Your masters have told you to babble about drones whenever the GWB torture regime is brought up and, by jove, you all do exactly as you're told.

;-)
 

Barbella

Senator
It matters what an insane person uses as his excuse for this.

In this war against terrorists, you think it's WRONG to torture the men we captured on the battlefield, but it's OK to kill innocent people in far far more numbers??

You realize how INSANE that makes you?
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
I would be very worried about Pugs' opposition to Obama's bombing of terrorists if I didn't know that you would all do a 180 if we get another GOP president, and once again support the bombing of terrorists.

Of course, then I worry about having a GOP president, since that would finish off the nation before we even fully recovered from the last one, but I digress.

;-)
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
It's truly amazing how obedient all you GOP droids are.

Your masters have told you to babble about drones whenever the GWB torture regime is brought up and, by jove, you all do exactly as you're told.

;-)
Sooooooooooo.................just to be clear here, EXACTLY as I said I suspected, like the predictable loony li bby you continually show yourself to be, you did in fact, once again opt to call me a name before running off to lick your wounds/self........

Damn, you would think, hell, I would think, that constantly pinning you to the mat using your OWN words would become a bore after all this time but I gotta tell ya skippy, this sh it just NEVER grows old.

Thanks for continuing to play along.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Sooooooooooo.................just to be clear here, EXACTLY as I said I suspected, like the predictable loony li bby you continually show yourself to be, you did in fact, once again opt to call me a name before running off to lick your wounds/self........

Damn, you would think, hell, I would think, that constantly pinning you to the mat using your OWN words would become a bore after all this time but I gotta tell ya skippy, this sh it just NEVER grows old.

Thanks for continuing to play along.
If you're at all interested in trying to focus on a topic, read the TP and respond to what it says.

I'm joking, of course - I know you can't do that.

;-)
 

UPNYA2

Mayor
If you're at all interested in trying to focus on a topic, read the TP and respond to what it says.

I'm joking, of course - I know you can't do that.

;-)
Sorry, buggy, I did that 2 responses ago. I answered your question and asked your answer to it and a question of my own.

YOU neglected to respond in kind. Seems to me that now "discussion" is the latest word you dems/libs have elected to pervert, re-define to suit your personal, bizzaro desires. A "discussion" is NOT the liberal circle jerk/daisy chain where all of you loons on the left join hands, kiss each other in the ear talk sh it about Bush while stroking one another, sorry.

See, when entering a "discussion", the individual parties present their views on the issueS being "discussed". Something that, once again, YOU elected to not do. Therefore, until YOU sprout the one tiny fuzzy little testicle it might take to actually take and defend an actual position I would recommend you refrain from trying to act as if another will not focus on a topic.

Just a friendly suggestion, not that I am under any illusion you will actually take it but I offer it because I care.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
I would be very worried about Pugs' opposition to Obama's bombing of terrorists if I didn't know that you would all do a 180 if we get another GOP president, and once again support the bombing of terrorists.

Of course, then I worry about having a GOP president, since that would finish off the nation before we even fully recovered from the last one, but I digress.

;-)
When did we declare war anyhow?
I don't remember Obama getting a declaration of war approved in the Congress.

You seem to be conflating our tactical strikes on terrorists with declaring war against another nation.
When that logic doesn't hold, what's the justification for Obama's killing over 1,400 innocent people versus the waterboarding of three?

Another loser thread, more misplaced political hatred and faux outrage by a buffoon.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Sorry, buggy, I did that 2 responses ago. I answered your question and asked your answer to it and a question of my own.

YOU neglected to respond in kind. Seems to me that now "discussion" is the latest word you dems/libs have elected to pervert, re-define to suit your personal, bizzaro desires. A "discussion" is NOT the liberal circle jerk/daisy chain where all of you loons on the left join hands, kiss each other in the ear talk sh it about Bush while stroking one another, sorry.

See, when entering a "discussion", the individual parties present their views on the issueS being "discussed". Something that, once again, YOU elected to not do. Therefore, until YOU sprout the one tiny fuzzy little testicle it might take to actually take and defend an actual position I would recommend you refrain from trying to act as if another will not focus on a topic.

Just a friendly suggestion, not that I am under any illusion you will actually take it but I offer it because I care.
You have an amazing knack f0r typing words without saying anything.

The law of averages says that, now and then, you will say something by accident while typings lots of words.

Nope.

;-)
 
Top