Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2012, 01:32 PM  
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $22076
Obama administration pushed for "drone rulebook" during the election.

Imagine that.

President Obama and his administration were perfectly fine with the drone program's complete extralegal operation in the shadows with no accountability and no legal red tape guiding their operations to make sure the power to kill people far, far away weren't absolute.

Then, the election rolls along. There's a chance that Mitt Romney actually wins the thing, and at this point the Obama administration realizes: maybe it's not a good thing to have limitless, extralegal power to kill with no accountability? I mean, the Republicans aren't us, we can't trust them as much.

Epic ****ing facepalm. The realization that accountability needs to be in place to protect us from the other party, rather than to protect the most basic foundations of American jurisprudence, due process, and public service. Just shockingly stupid.

Add into all of this: the Obama administration is seeking a rulebook. Whatever that is. Legal framework? Legal accountability? Better access for oversight? It may not be until another Republican comes close to winning a Presidential election before we find out. Christ.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/wo...pagewanted=all

Election Spurred a Move to Codify U.S. Drone Policy
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: November 24, 2012

WASHINGTON — Facing the possibility that President Obama might not win a second term, his administration accelerated work in the weeks before the election to develop explicit rules for the targeted killing of terrorists by unmanned drones, so that a new president would inherit clear standards and procedures, according to two administration officials.

The matter may have lost some urgency after Nov. 6. But with more than 300 drone strikes and some 2,500 people killed by the Central Intelligence Agency and the military since Mr. Obama first took office, the administration is still pushing to make the rules formal and resolve internal uncertainty and disagreement about exactly when lethal action is justified.

Mr. Obama and his advisers are still debating whether remote-control killing should be a measure of last resort against imminent threats to the United States, or a more flexible tool, available to help allied governments attack their enemies or to prevent militants from controlling territory.

Though publicly the administration presents a united front on the use of drones, behind the scenes there is longstanding tension. The Defense Department and the C.I.A. continue to press for greater latitude to carry out strikes; Justice Department and State Department officials, and the president’s counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan, have argued for restraint, officials involved in the discussions say.

More broadly, the administration’s legal reasoning has not persuaded many other countries that the strikes are acceptable under international law. For years before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the United States routinely condemned targeted killings of suspected terrorists by Israel, and most countries still object to such measures.

But since the first targeted killing by the United States in 2002, two administrations have taken the position that the United States is at war with Al Qaeda and its allies and can legally defend itself by striking its enemies wherever they are found.

Partly because United Nations officials know that the United States is setting a legal and ethical precedent for other countries developing armed drones, the U.N. plans to open a unit in Geneva early next year to investigate American drone strikes.

The attempt to write a formal rule book for targeted killing began last summer after news reports on the drone program, started under President George W. Bush and expanded by Mr. Obama, revealed some details of the president’s role in the shifting procedures for compiling “kill lists” and approving strikes. Though national security officials insist that the process is meticulous and lawful, the president and top aides believe it should be institutionalized, a course of action that seemed particularly urgent when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the presidency.

“There was concern that the levers might no longer be in our hands,” said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity. With a continuing debate about the proper limits of drone strikes, Mr. Obama did not want to leave an “amorphous” program to his successor, the official said. The effort, which would have been rushed to completion by January had Mr. Romney won, will now be finished at a more leisurely pace, the official said.

Mr. Obama himself, in little-noticed remarks, has acknowledged that the legal governance of drone strikes is still a work in progress.

“One of the things we’ve got to do is put a legal architecture in place, and we need Congressional help in order to do that, to make sure that not only am I reined in but any president’s reined in terms of some of the decisions that we’re making,” Mr. Obama told Jon Stewart in an appearance on “The Daily Show” on Oct. 18.

In an interview with Mark Bowden for a new book on the killing of Osama bin Laden, “The Finish,” Mr. Obama said that “creating a legal structure, processes, with oversight checks on how we use unmanned weapons, is going to be a challenge for me and my successors for some time to come.”

The president expressed wariness of the powerful temptation drones pose to policy makers. “There’s a remoteness to it that makes it tempting to think that somehow we can, without any mess on our hands, solve vexing security problems,” he said.

Despite public remarks by Mr. Obama and his aides on the legal basis for targeted killing, the program remains officially classified. In court, fighting lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times seeking secret legal opinions on targeted killings, the government has refused even to acknowledge the existence of the drone program in Pakistan.

But by many accounts, there has been a significant shift in the nature of the targets. In the early years, most strikes were aimed at ranking leaders of Al Qaeda thought to be plotting to attack the United States. That is the purpose Mr. Obama has emphasized, saying in a CNN interview in September that drones were used to prevent “an operational plot against the United States” and counter “terrorist networks that target the United States.”

But for at least two years in Pakistan, partly because of the C.I.A.’s success in decimating Al Qaeda’s top ranks, most strikes have been directed at militants whose main battle is with the Pakistani authorities or who fight with the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan.

In Yemen, some strikes apparently launched by the United States killed militants who were preparing to attack Yemeni military forces. Some of those killed were wearing suicide vests, according to Yemeni news reports.

“Unless they were about to get on a flight to New York to conduct an attack, they were not an imminent threat to the United States,” said Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who is a critic of the strikes. “We don’t say that we’re the counterinsurgency air force of Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, but we are.”

Then there is the matter of strikes against people whose identities are unknown. In an online video chat in January, Mr. Obama spoke of the strikes in Pakistan as “a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists.” But for several years, first in Pakistan and later in Yemen, in addition to “personality strikes” against named terrorists, the C.I.A. and the military have carried out “signature strikes” against groups of suspected, unknown militants.

Originally that term was used to suggest the specific “signature” of a known high-level terrorist, such as his vehicle parked at a meeting place. But the word evolved to mean the “signature” of militants in general — for instance, young men toting arms in an area controlled by extremist groups. Such strikes have prompted the greatest conflict inside the Obama administration, with some officials questioning whether killing unidentified fighters is legally justified or worth the local backlash.

Many people inside and outside the government have argued for far greater candor about all of the strikes, saying excessive secrecy has prevented public debate in Congress or a full explanation of their rationale. Experts say the strikes are deeply unpopular both in Pakistan and Yemen, in part because of allegations of large numbers of civilian casualties, which American officials say are exaggerated.

Gregory D. Johnsen, author of “The Last Refuge: Yemen, Al Qaeda and America’s War in Arabia,” argues that the strike strategy is backfiring in Yemen. “In Yemen, Al Qaeda is actually expanding,” Mr. Johnsen said in a recent talk at the Brookings Institution, in part because of the backlash against the strikes.

Shuja Nawaz, a Pakistan-born analyst now at the Atlantic Council in Washington, said the United States should start making public a detailed account of the results of each strike, including any collateral deaths, in part to counter propaganda from jihadist groups. “This is a grand opportunity for the Obama administration to take the drones out of the shadows and to be open about their objectives,” he said.

But the administration appears to be a long way from embracing such openness. The draft rule book for drone strikes that has been passed among agencies over the last several months is so highly classified, officials said, that it is hand-carried from office to office rather than sent by e-mail.
Posts: 46,681
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 07:24 PM   #61
mlyonsd mlyonsd is offline
Supporter
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spink, SD
Casino cash: $9389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature View Post
It's not, if torture is ineffective. My understanding is that torture is ineffective. The net gain from it is nearly zero, whereas the net loss (goodwill, greater use of effective alternatives) outweighs.
That's a more fair argument which could be debated on what the information is you gain.
Posts: 25,334
mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 07:36 PM   #62
mlyonsd mlyonsd is offline
Supporter
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spink, SD
Casino cash: $9389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawnmower View Post
This is the 4th time you have made this connection, and it is still just as stupid as the 1st time. I give up. You are too dumb to bother with.
I don't care what you think of me but the original point stands.

It's ironic there were rules of interrogation in place but nothing specific about using drones that causes innocent people to die.
Posts: 25,334
mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 07:39 PM   #63
Chocolate Hog Chocolate Hog is offline
Winner
 
Chocolate Hog's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: My house
Casino cash: $10632
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief View Post
Al-Quaeda was a real threat to us here in the homeland. They had the infrastructure, communications and logistics to really pull off another killing Americans on USA soil.

I hate that innocents die in these strikes. And yes, more terrorists are created because of these drone strikes. Al-Quaeda is still dangerous but no longer a credible threat on the scale of 9/11. The main reason for this is the decimation of their leadership and militant cells through drone strikes. It's war, innocent people get killed.

IMHO, to achieved that outcome, those drone strikes and the resulting collateral damage is just part of the tragedy of war.
I'm sorry but this simply isn't true. We are no safer now than we were on 9-11and drone strikes have certainly created more enemies.
Posts: 34,903
Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Chocolate Hog 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 08:15 PM   #64
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature View Post
It's not, if torture is ineffective. My understanding is that torture is ineffective. The net gain from it is nearly zero, whereas the net loss (goodwill, greater use of effective alternatives) outweighs.
Where did you gain this understanding?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 08:57 PM   #65
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Where did you gain this understanding?
Stuart Herrington
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:01 PM   #66
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2008...nce-gathering/

Quote:
New York City — Fifteen former interrogators and intelligence officials with more than 350 years collective field experience have declared that torture is an “unlawful, ineffective and counterproductive” way to gather intelligence, in a statement of principles released today.

The group of former interrogators and intelligence officials released a set of principles to guide effective interrogation practices at the conclusion of a meeting convened by Human Rights First last week in Washington. The meeting participants served with the CIA, the FBI and the U.S. military.

The principles are based on the interrogators and intelligence officials’ experiences of what works and what does not in the field. Interrogation techniques that do not resort to torture yield more complete and accurate intelligence, they say. The principles call for the creation of a well-defined single standard of conduct in interrogation and detention practices across all U.S. agencies. At stake is the loss of critical intelligence and time, as well as the United States’ reputation abroad and its credibility in demanding the humane treatment of captured Americans.
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:15 PM   #67
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature View Post
Stuart Herrington
I don't know who that is, but based on the article you linked, it sounds like you're just repeating what you've been told rather than having been convinced by evidence or compelling argument.

Did any of the "experts" you're relying on admit to extensive use of torture? Or did they explain how they've developed their expertise on the subject?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:16 PM   #68
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I don't know who that is, but based on the article you linked, it sounds like you're just repeating what you've been told rather than having been convinced by evidence or compelling argument.
I'll admit that I haven't personally tortured anyone, so I rely on these experts. Have you tortured anyone? What were your results?
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:18 PM   #69
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature View Post
I'll admit that I haven't personally tortured anyone, so I rely on these experts. Have you tortured anyone? What were your results?
What experts? What makes them experts?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:25 PM   #70
stonedstooge stonedstooge is online now
Arf! Arf! Arf!
 
stonedstooge's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North
Casino cash: $18511
A press release from Human Rights Now?
__________________
2013 ADOPT A CHIEF
Eric Kush




"Often is a word I seldom use"--JP
Posts: 22,433
stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.stonedstooge is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:30 PM   #71
Pawnmower Pawnmower is online now
MVP
 
Pawnmower's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern California
Casino cash: $24427
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlyonsd View Post
I don't care what you think of me but the original point stands.

It's ironic there were rules of interrogation in place but nothing specific about using drones that causes innocent people to die.
Look you stupid buffoon...The only ironic thing is you don't understand the difference between killing someone on accident during a chaotic situation not under your control and killing/torturing someone ON PURPOSE while the situation is under your complete control.

The fact you continue to blabber on about not getting it just shows what a ****ing tool you are.

It has always been, that in warfare there are civilian casualties...the weaponry we have now causes the least amount of civilian casualties in the history of combat. To try and equate the INTENTIONAL killing / torture of a prisoner, while held under your control with civilian casualties during a combat mission is ****ing dumb.

You aren't confused because this is difficult, you are confused because you are a ****ing imbecile.

It is a war crime to torture or kill prisoners. It isn't a war crime if a civilian dies accidentally....It is a war crime if a soldier kills civillians on purpose (and the USA is one of the only places that prosecutes these crimes)

Now do you ****ing get it?

Or are you still a ****ing retard?
__________________
-------------------
(Your company name here)
Posts: 16,516
Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.Pawnmower is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:41 PM   #72
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
What experts? What makes them experts?
The "15 individuals who served as senior interrogators, interviewers and intelligence officials in the United States military, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Central Intelligence Agency" from the link. Their experience and knowledge in the field makes them experts.

Are you another expert in this field? Have you tortured persons? What were your results? What makes you qualified to have a credible opinion on this subject?
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:42 PM   #73
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedstooge View Post
A press release from Human Rights Now?
No, Human Rights First.
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:51 PM   #74
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature View Post
The "15 individuals who served as senior interrogators, interviewers and intelligence officials in the United States military, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Central Intelligence Agency" from the link. Their experience and knowledge in the field makes them experts.

Are you another expert in this field? Have you tortured persons? What were your results? What makes you qualified to have a credible opinion on this subject?
Like I asked before have they had extensive experience in torture? If not, what makes them experts?

I've never tortured anyone, but I've performed many successful interrogations. Does that make me an expert too?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 09:54 PM   #75
La literatura La literatura is offline
MVP
 
La literatura's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Like I asked before have they had extensive experience in torture? If not, what makes them experts?

I've never tortured anyone, but I've performed many successful interrogations. Does that make me an expert too?
You might be. Were your interrogations related to national security and military intelligence? That's part of what those 15 people did for a career.
Posts: 7,171
La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.La literatura is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:04 PM.


This is a test for a client's site.
A new website that shows member-created construction site listings that need fill or have excess fill. Dirt Monkey @ https://DirtMonkey.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.