Terrorism 101
by Lee
Here’s even more proof that Bush’s incompetence and ineptitude have turned a legitimate war on terror into the world’s largest terrorist training school.
The Iraq war, which for years has drawn militants from around the world, is beginning to export fighters and the tactics they have honed in the insurgency to neighboring countries and beyond, according to American, European and Middle Eastern government officials and interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.
Some of the fighters appear to be leaving as part of the waves of Iraqi refugees crossing borders that government officials acknowledge they struggle to control. But others are dispatched from Iraq for specific missions. In the Jordanian airport plot, the authorities said they believed that the bomb maker flew from Baghdad to prepare the explosives for Mr. Darsi.
Estimating the number of fighters leaving Iraq is at least as difficult as it has been to count foreign militants joining the insurgency. But early signs of an exodus are clear, and officials in the United States and the Middle East say the potential for veterans of the insurgency to spread far beyond Iraq is significant.
Maj. Gen. Achraf Rifi, general director of the Internal Security Forces in Lebanon, said in a recent interview that “if any country says it is safe from this, they are putting their heads in the sand.”
But wait, it gets better.
In an April 17 report written for the United States government, Dennis Pluchinsky, a former senior intelligence analyst at the State Department, said battle-hardened militants from Iraq posed a greater threat to the West than extremists who trained in Afghanistan because Iraq had become a laboratory for urban guerrilla tactics.
“There are some operational parallels between the urban terrorist activity in Iraq and the urban environments in Europe and the United States,” Mr. Pluchinsky wrote. “More relevant terrorist skills are transferable from Iraq to Europe than from Afghanistan to Europe,” he went on, citing the use of safe houses, surveillance, bomb making and mortars.
A top American military official who tracks terrorism in Iraq and the surrounding region, and who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said: “Do I think in the future the jihad will be fueled from the battlefield of Iraq? Yes. More so than the battlefield of Afghanistan.”
Getting the hell out of Iraq isn’t a surrender thing, it’s a strategic thing. Rather than “fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here,” we’re “training them there so we have to fight them in every city in the world.”
The Bush Legacy, ladies and gentlemen.
Update: Here’s a question for you to think about. One of the things I despise about liberalism is its insistence on sticking to a social program, even when it can clearly be demonstrated that not only isn’t the program solving the problem it was meant to help, it is actually making it worse. Look at welfare for just one example. Five trillion dollars later and we haven’t come one iota closer to “solving” poverty. In fact we’ve made it worse, with generation after generation of families locked in a cycle of dependence, suckling at the ample teat of government for their every need. The black family has been destroyed, with over 80% of babies growing up in fatherless homes. This is all the result of welfare, and liberals STILL claim that the problem is that we need more money and resources thrown at the problem.
Sound familiar?
I am as in favor of killing our enemies as anyone else. But if it can be shown that the prosecution of the war on terror is actually antithetical to the goals of that war, doesn’t it make sense to completely reevaluate your tactics? If your goal is to do something about poverty, supporting an expansion of the welfare state is the worst possible thing you could do. And, if you actually want to kill and defeat our Islamofascist enemies, is giving them the world’s largest terrorist training school really the best thing to do in furtherance of that goal?
Comments
The problem is there is going to be death and destruction by staying in Iraq and death and destruction by leaving; I am unsure which of these will be of a higher magnitude.
The death and d3estruction to Iraqis will probably be higher if we leave. But I’m approaching this from a military necessity and national security standpoint—what is in the best interests of the United States? And being in the middle of a Sunni/Shi’ite secular and tribal civil war is not in our best interests.
Lee.....what can I say?
Pluchinsky is saying only that the terrorists fighting against us in Iraq are more likely to have fought in the urban environment, and that those ‘talents’ are more applicable in urbanized Europe than the rural fighting learned by the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan.
also, one of the sources this author uses is “...interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.” Why would any militant leader claim that what the United States is doing in Iraq was effective? Of COURSE they are going to say that the jihad is expanding....these jihadists are trained to play the media. I would also say that European and Middle Eastern government officials, many of whom oppose the war in Iraq, can be counted on to hold that opinion as well....that what the US is doing is spreading Islamofascist terrorism.
The article also mentions that the terrorists are leaving Iraq....that’s the goal. The goal is to force them out and establish Iraq as a safe and stable nation-state. If they leave, violence is reduced, and the Iraqi government can turn it’s full attention on national reconciliation...a task they have not been able to focus on fully because of the al-Qaeda-based violence.
If countries like Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Lebanon are forced to directly face the spectre of Islamofascist terror, they might get the idea that GWB tried to convey to them five years ago. The problem Europe has, like much of the Middle East, is that they refused to deal with the terrorists directly....instead, they bought them off, or ignored the problem, or tried to hide the problem. Well, that indifference and that policy brought us 9-11, and brought the 7-7 bombings, and the 3-11 bombings.
I think this article points at one more thing.....the Left is now floating an excuse for success in Iraq. They are building a negative out of success in Iraq by saying, “The reason there are no more terrorists in Iraq is because they have gotten their experience, and have moved on to bigger and better things, like Europe, because of McIdiotChimpyHalliburton Bushitler and his direct orders to torture innocent sheep herders in Guantanamo.”
Getting the hell out of Iraq isn’t a surrender thing, it’s a strategic thing.
I hope you mean moving to the North/South of Iraq where things are a little more peaceful. Even still, it’s a bad idea. Having a military presence in Iraq is necessary for the coming war with Iran. Dividing the military or withdrawing completely would be a huge mistake. It would be dividing forces and giving Iran a huge territory advantage. That is the primary importance of being in Iraq is to surround Iran. I know everyone made a big stink about the WMD and how Bush lied. He also stated quite clearly that Iran was a target (axis of evil), but the actions of the administration reflect that when they aren’t completely fucking everything else up.
If you want to change strategic tactics, learn how to secure a fucking border so the enemy can’t get in or out.
Lee....I am sure that in 1944, there were a lot of very experienced, very efficient Nazi soldiers in Europe. However, I don’t think WWII ended up being a great training ground for Nazi soldiers. I would also add that a lot of Nazis tried to leave before the end of the war, and it was only because they were surrounded by enemy nations that they were captured. This war is like fighting WWII, but France, England, Belgium, and the USSR are supportive of the Nazis.
This war is not like the welfare fiasco.
Lee....I am sure that in 1944, there were a lot of very experienced, very efficient Nazi soldiers in Europe. However, I don’t think WWII ended up being a great training ground for Nazi soldiers.
Huh??? Of course it did. The difference is that, once the Nazis were defeated, they were put on public trial, with all the rights and legal protections they had denied their victims, after which they were either sentenced to prison or executed. There was a sense of finality with the Nazis because, as a movement and as an army, they were defeated.
Communism is a much more apt example. It’s still around. Because there was no Nuremberg trial to showcase the crimes of communism, we still have kids wearing Che Guevara t-shirts and the Michael Moores of the world who view Fidel Castro as the ultimate political leader. This is because, unlike Nazism, there was no official end to communism.
Note that the Nuremberg trials didn’t end antisemitism, nor did it didn’t end national socialism. What they did do was end any legitimacy that this movement might have had among the average citizenry. This is what we need with radical Islam. We need to show the Islamic world that the barbarity in their midst has repercussions. The problem is that Bush, in the greatest example of his stunning ineptitude, has actually made radical violent Islam MORE acceptable among the average Muslims. He’s created a situation where MORE terrorists have practical, firsthand, on-site training setting IEDs and other weapons against enemy forces.
He has turned Iraq, literally, into the world’s largest terrorist training academy. Our “war on terror” has turned into “Terrorist University.”
If you think we’re fighting them “over there” now, wait 10 or 20 years until suicide bombings and IEDs are happening “over here.”
Note that the Nuremberg trials didn’t end antisemitism, nor did it didn’t end national socialism. What they did do was end any legitimacy that this movement might have had among the average citizenry. This is what we need with radical Islam. We need to show the Islamic world that the barbarity in their midst has repercussions.
So we can begin putting terrorists on trial at Guantanamo and hanging them? It’s interesting to me that you won’t let our intelligence professionals keep a terrorist suspect up past his bedtime to answer questions, but you are apparently willing to string him up. Interesting viewpoint.
So we can begin putting terrorists on trial at Guantanamo and hanging them? It’s interesting to me that you won’t let our intelligence professionals keep a terrorist suspect up past his bedtime to answer questions, but you are apparently willing to string him up. Interesting viewpoint.
Well, it’s only interesting to you because you’re functionally retarded.
Look, a serial killer who goes around kidnapping children, chopping their heads off, and eating their genitalia, is STILL entitled to legal counsel and a fair trial. As far as “keeping a terror suspect up past his bedtime,” this is exactly the sort of trite, flippant dismissal of what we are engaging in which enables barbarity to take place. If you ever want to know how an ordinary German soldier ends up desensitized enough to push Jews into the gas chamber, just look in the mirror. As soon as you start viewing certain humans as being beneath fundamental human rights then you become less human yourself.
I would submit the following as key differences:
1. We were at war with not just Nazis, but with Germany, the nation-state. The nation of Germany went freely to war, accepting the Nazis as their rulers. The Nazi’s did not rule Germany against the will of the people, nor did they start WWII with the nation rising in revolt against them. The nation of Germany was fighting us, so they were targets...their cities, their factories, their workers producing arms and other material vital for the war effort. The Iraqis and Afghanis were not like that, nor were they at that point. We are not attacking Iraq to destroy it, which would entail total war as it did against Germany and Japan, but to remove the despot leading it and install a new government. We’re not killing someone and dismembering the corpse, were cutting out a cancer before it spreads.
2. The political climate is different. The trials at Nuremburg could not happen now, as there are groups that are well-connected with the media that would leap to their defense. The World Worker’s Party didn’t do or say a thing when 9-11 happened, but they opposed our entry into Afghanistan (and Iraq). The pro-Communists, who would be natural adversaries to the Islamofascists (if only because of Chechnya and the hyper-nationalistic/religious fanaticism), support them wholeheartedly because they oppose the United States. Che and the socialistic left are mostly either post-nationalistic Europhilles, Baby-Boomers, or college students...counter-culture and self-revolutionary.
So we can begin putting terrorists on trial at Guantanamo and hanging them?
I forgot to answer your question. Yes, of course, anyone who is guilty should be tried fairly, and if convicted have an appropriate sentence meted out. The problem is that, because of their clear and well-documented adoption of torture, the Bush administration has made it so that a fair trial is impossible. As any lawyer can explain, fundamental rules of procedure prohibit evidence obtained under torture. So all these “suspects” we have in prison right now, many of whom have been held for FIVE FUCKING YEARS without a trial, are going to be forced to sit there in limbo, with no way to prove their innocence should they be so, because Dubya and the gang wanted to hear a few Arabs scream. And true blur Amurkan patriots such as yourself have done everything possible to enable them.
As soon as you start viewing certain humans as being beneath fundamental human rights then you become less human yourself.
And this is where you reveal just how out to lunch you are, you fucking bipolar boob. Even if terrorist detainees were legitimate prisoners of war, they would not be entitled to legal counsel. As I follow your arguments, it seems you are trying to come to one of two conclusions in that God-awful train wreck which you call your thought process:
(1) Terrorists should be treated as common criminals and do not have to answer any questions ever. They can recieve a trial in court and classified information can be exposed for the purpose of obtaining a conviction without regard for the damage it does to the war effort.
or
(2) Terrorists are prisoners of war and do not have to answer any questions. We can only detain them but can’t send them back to their home countries because they may get tortured there. A war crimes trial may be conducted, but of course, classified information may still be revealed as evidence.
For months now, all you have done is bitch about interrogation techniques vs torture. Why don’t you become an advocate for the military tribunals instead of carryng on with this endless whining?
Thrill, you fucking ignoramus, I’ve been advocating for a legitimate military trial for THREE GODDAMN FUCKING YEARS now. If you actually read something other than Hugh Hewitt and Power Line you might actually learn a little about this subject.
Terrorists are not prisoners of war according to Geneva. I’ve never claimed they were. That being said, simply by stating that they’re not POWs does NOT give us the right, as a nation, to treat them as if they were cattle. You’re assuming that every person we have in detention is a battle-hardened terrorist mastermind, when most of them are either low-ranking dumbasses who know nothing or, even worse, actually innocent of all charges.
Terrorists should be questioned ACCORDING TO THE FUCKING RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT HAVE SERVED US WELL FOR THE PAST SIXTY FUCKING YEARS. Do you know who wrote all these laws you now hold in such contempt? WE DID. The US, the French, the Brits, and the rest of the allies. In response to the atrocities of the Nazi era WE wrote these laws, to signify what are honorable methods of prisoner treatment and what are not. They have served us flawlessly since WWII. After 9/11 Cheney and Rummy, aided by legal briefs written by Woo and Gonzales, convinced our “think with his gut” president that these “enhanced interrogation techniques” didn’t violate Geneva or any other law.
What we are doing now is, literally, engaging in the same fucking behavior that caused our Founding Fathers to fight the Revolutionary War.
I have never once advocated giving these detainees full Constitutional protections. I have never once advocated giving them trials in civilian court. But what I *HAVE* said, and will say again since you were too fucking stupid to understand it the first 8,000 times I’ve said it, is that we need SOME KIND OF SYSTEM, which is legitimate and transparent and as public as possible, where these men are given fair trials. If they’re found guilty, take them out back and hang them for all I care. But the innocent men in jail deserve a hearing, some sort of adjudication. That’s how civilized people act.
You, through your own words, have clearly proved yourself to be an ignorant redneck, who just wants to “hang them there A-rabs” so you can feel like a man.
The rules of what constitutes torture are clear. They’ve been clear for 60 years. It wasn’t until this president and his corrupt cadre of shitbag advisers came along that there was even any question of what you could or couldn’t do to a prisoner.
It’s the “screaming Arab” thing, and guys like you have a burning need for it.
It’s the “screaming Arab” thing, and guys like you have a burning need for it.
No, it’s a “screaming Lee” thing. You don’t seem to have anything but a psychotic need to bitch about Bush’s methods of combating international Islamic terrorism to the exclusion of all else. Everybody knows what you are against, dick-cheese. What I would like to know is just exactly what your grand strategy is for dealing with the terrorists in a way that is legal and effective. It really sucks that you decided to degrade your blog by arguing like a liberal.
If questioning terrorist detainees is off the table in Lee-land, just what the hell are we supposed to do with them?
Gentlemen.....can we keep it civil?
Lee, my point is that...well, you know where I stand on the torture thing. And where I stand on OIF.
This thread’s gotten a little harsh. I’m puttin’ on my helmet and gettin’ into my foxhole.
It’s interesting to me that you won’t let our intelligence professionals keep a terrorist suspect up past his bedtime to answer questions, but you are apparently willing to string him up. Interesting viewpoint.
sleep deprivation is torture. i’m sorry, it is. I am a chronic insomniac, and I have stayed up as many as three consecutive days in a row, due to needing to perform the day after I didn’t sleep.
Put it this way, if they can keep you up after about five days, you will be clinically insane and hallucinating. You hallucinate because (as i’ve figured out in my diagnosis) for whatever reason your mind needs to dream in order to keep your sanity in check. If your mind cannot do so whhile asleep it will attempt the process while awake.
If you make it to that state, you will never recover from it, and it is less than seven days to achieve it. this is torture, and I as an insomniac am getting pretty sick and fucking tired of people glossing this over. Reaad a fucking book. there are documented instance of people going insane forever because of this. A radio host in the fifties (i’ll dig him up).
It’s torture 101.
What I would like to know is just exactly what your grand strategy is for dealing with the terrorists in a way that is legal and effective
The Army Field Manual would be a good place for you to start learning.
If questioning terrorist detainees is off the table in Lee-land, just what the hell are we supposed to do with them?
This is your typical straw man attack. I’ve never said questioning detainees was off the table. I said that TORTURING detainees is off the table.
But real tough guys like you can’t make the distinction, can you?
I’m curious, Thrill, you ever served in the military?
sleep deprivation is torture. i’m sorry, it is. I am a chronic insomniac, and I have stayed up as many as three consecutive days in a row, due to needing to perform the day after I didn’t sleep.
Hell fuck yes. As I’ve disclosed on this blog, I’ve been a chronic insomniac for 20 years or so, and a few years ago I was diagnosed with OCD. I’ve been taking medication of one kind or another to help me sleep since I was a senior in high school. I remember going to see a Navy doctor to complain about my severe insomnia, because I was late to muster quite a bit and was getting in trouble, and his solution was to write me a prescription for two benadryl and said “This’ll get you back on track.”
Big help doc, thanks. That fucking asshole doctor was probably the main reason that I didn’t seek medical help for this problem sooner, because I didn’t think anyone would take me seriously.
I started taking Ambien maybe 5 years ago. It’s saved my life. I’ve since built up a tolerance to it, so I started taking Dalmane, which is in the same family of benzodiazepines as Ambien and Lunesta.
About two months ago there was a screw-up with my doctor where he didn’t call my refills in on time. I was awake for three days, getting maybe one or two hours of restless sleep a night. I was physically exhausted, my hands were shaking, I couldn’t concentrate. On Monday, when I managed to get ahold of him and had him call in my meds, I was a fucking basket case. I’d had maybe 4 hours sleep in 3 days. I was losing my fucking mind.
I can only begin to imagine what it must be like to be a captive and be forced to stay awake for three or four days at a time. Anyone who says that staying awake for three days isn’t torture, go ahead and try it. I fucking dare you.
I can only begin to imagine what it must be like to be a captive and be forced to stay awake for three or four days at a time. Anyone who says that staying awake for three days isn’t torture, go ahead and try it. I fucking dare you.
I’m sure the justification of the tactic is to get the detainee to a point at which they will confess anything in order to get some sleep. On the plus side it sounds harmeless on paper. It’s not like they’re pulling your fingernails out one by one.
On the negative side, you stand to be terminally insane if either you or the ‘interrogating’ party can’t clearly identifiy with you being tired and you slipping into permanent dimentia.
From all that I have experienced and read, if your mind starts to allow you to hallucinate to dream, your permanently fucked.
On the negative side, you stand to be terminally insane if either you or the ‘interrogating’ party can’t clearly identifiy with you being tired and you slipping into permanent dimentia.
From all that I have experienced and read, if your mind starts to allow you to hallucinate to dream, your permanently fucked.
This seems to be the case with Jose Padilla. He’s a fucking talking monkey now after three years in trial. And, let us not forget, Padilla is an American citizen captured on American soil. But Emperor Bush declared him an “enemy combatant” and, oops, so solly, you have no Constitutional rights any more.
And it just sickens me to think that conservatives, a movement of which I still consider myself a part, are spearheading this charge towards authoritarianism. I mean, the liberals are the ones who always wanted government to control your life, the conservatives used to want the church to control it. Now the liberals are opposed to these methods, and the conservatives are all gung-ho for wiping their ass with not only the Constitution but with every other agreement this country has ever signed on to.
I used to wonder when “guilty until proven innocent” became the norm in the US. With the terrorist situation, I wonder when “we hold these things to be self evident that all men are created equal” became only applicable to Americans. Holding people indefinitely is an abomination. We have done this to American citizens, so I guess if you aren’t American, you’re FUCKED.
Lee and I are on fairly opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I usually can follow the process that got him where he stands. I would have used the “War on Drugs” instead of welfare. Welfare doesn’t come close to the WOD in decimating black culture. How can you marry and raise a family if you are in jail for a petty drug violation? Welfare for those left behind seems only fair.
Lee,
There is a difference here. You tried to sleep wanted to sleep and just could not. Nobody was there forcing you to stay awake.
What im actually surprised about is that you are JUST hearing about this type of interrogation, and you think we haven’t been doing this since oh the revolutionary war.
I was a fucking basket case
That’s the point!
Just curious, Lee. Have you ever tried a course of Halcion? (It’s a benzo, too) I remember with Dalmane there was a bit of a hangover. Halcion didn’t seem to have that, altho I know it isn’t marketed very heavily anymore.
There is a difference here. You tried to sleep wanted to sleep and just could not. Nobody was there forcing you to stay awake.
Exactly. I’m not seeing your point, unless you think that being forced to stay awake is somehow lesser in severity than natural insomnia?
What im actually surprised about is that you are JUST hearing about this type of interrogation, and you think we haven’t been doing this since oh the revolutionary war.
This country has done a lot of despicable shit in its past. Slavery, the decimation of the Indians, and so on. I’m not ignorant, I know that this has been going on for centuries.
But WWII changed everything. It was evident that the punitive policies against Germany after WWI directly led to WWII. So, after WWII, the Allies decided to make an example of how civilized nations act. They conducted the Nuremberg Trials with honor and integrity, threated even despicable Nazi war criminals with the respect afforded any prisoner, and executed or imprisoned them. In the eyes of history the Nuremberg trials are regarded with the utmost legitimacy, as well they should.
In the years following WWII there were calls for a new international body to govern the behavior of nations. This became the UN. Unlike the League of Nations, the UN has the security council, which can use force to keep recalcitrant nations in line if necessary. The UN has become something other than what it was generally intended, and we can all hold the UN in the contempt it so richly deserves most of the time, but the idea and logic behind it were sound: civilized nations need to act in a civilized manner, and it is up to civilized nations to keep the peace.
The Geneva Accords, especially the revisions following WWII, were greatly influenced by the United States. Now, 60 years later, that same United States is using legal trickery and bogus parliamentary mumbo jumbo to circumvent the very laws the expect the rest of the world to adhere to.
We beat the Nazis and won the Cold War without resorting to torture. But, in the 60 years since WWII we’ve never had a president as weak and easily manipulated as Bush. Nobody even comes close.
That’s the point!
What’s the point?
1) To turn the guy into a basket case? If so that’s not interrogation it’s punishment. We wouldn’t be allowed to mete punishment like that out on a serial child molester. So is the purpose of torture to cause pain?
2) Or is the purpose of torture to extract information? Just how useful do you think the information coming from a hallucinating prisoner is going to be? So if the purpose of torture is to extract information, all we’re doing is extracting worthless information.
Just curious, Lee. Have you ever tried a course of Halcion? (It’s a benzo, too) I remember with Dalmane there was a bit of a hangover. Halcion didn’t seem to have that, altho I know it isn’t marketed very heavily anymore.
I’m going to speak to my doctor about it because there has been a bit of a hangover issue with the Dalmane, and I wanted to see if he had any other benzos he’d feel comfortable giving me.
2) Or is the purpose of torture to extract information? Just how useful do you think the information coming from a hallucinating prisoner is going to be? So if the purpose of torture is to extract information, all we’re doing is extracting worthless information.
The degree of anal comfort we wish to achieve aside, this would be why I don’t condone it as a method of interrogation. Remember Gardner? We’re just now seeing how much was covered up about hhis world record sleeplessness. He was delusional and incoherent past day five of his event (albiet contested on both ends).
simple fact of the matter is, along the way of depriving him of sleep he was getting thing all fucked up and seeing shit that wasn’t there. that’s not relevant information.
I know these Freudian interogators are trying to get into these terrorists ‘super-egos’ and all (this is sarcasm folks) but we’re obviously not in the know on some major shit. Like trying to assasinate Cheney in Afghanistan, for example.
Lee, have you ever posed the question from the other angle? Seems to me if sleep deprivation is so harmless, why bother doing it? It obviously doesn’t seem to be scaring any terrorists, right? And to the supporters, it seems to be so harmless I’d have to ask why then the US would use it as an interogation tactic?
Any answers?
I’ve had a tooth out without anasthetic and i’ve also been without sleep for a few days. I can tell you that by far the worst of the two was the sleep deprevation, you literally start to lose your mind which is what makes us human to begin with - anyone who wants to argue that sleep deprevation isn’t torture should test that out.
I’m going to speak to my doctor about it because there has been a bit of a hangover issue with the Dalmane, and I wanted to see if he had any other benzos he’d feel comfortable giving me.
After hearing about everyone’s insomnia I almost feel lucky. Almost..
I’m at the opposite end of the spectrum. I’ve never understood the people who say that sugar or a cup of coffee will keep them up all night. Caffeine has never had any effect on me. I can go to bed at 9pm and if I don’t set my alarm I won’t get up until 9 or 10 the next day. I almost lost a couple jobs in the past because of my inability to become wakefull at an alarm clock. I used to keep two alarm clocks at different ends of my bedroom to try and wake up on time.
Dakrat if you really want to test it have a friend keep you awake, s/he wont have to do much, just give you the odd poke or pour a bit of water over your face every so often. 36 hours should suffice.
Dakrat if you really want to test it have a friend keep you awake, s/he wont have to do much, just give you the odd poke or pour a bit of water over your face every so often. 36 hours should suffice.
Paul86, my comment was only about the insomnia of people commenting on this blog, and that I tend to sleep way too much instead of way too little like Lee and others.
I know that sleep deprivation causes much craziness.
The last time I was in with my psychiatrist I asked him about those sleep studies they give to people they suspect of having sleep apnia. “Do you think we could learn anything if they hooked me up to a bunch of electrodes and monitored my brain activity as I try and fall asleep? I’d love to know what my brain is doing that prevents me from sleeping.”
His reply: “Honestly, no. As it stands right now, the current thinking is that insomnia is a variation on a norm. It’s like bad eyesight. Even though everyone can see, some people see really badly and require a lifetime of corrective eyeglasses to solve their deficiency. The current thinking is that insomnia is in a similar manner. You just have a very, very poor ability to fall asleep. Given that you also have OCD those two are undoubtedly related in some way, but we don’t really know how.
You always hear the same stories from chronic insomniacs. They feel “alive” at night, like they’re nocturnal. They were incredibly hard children to put to sleep, and they were always getting up during the night. They would fall asleep a lot in class in school. Then, for some reason, no matter how tired they were they would get a second wind an hour or two before bedtime.”
Man, it’s like he’s written my life story. He continued:
“The problem is that insomnia is a symptom of something, but we have no idea what that something is. Medical science has absolutely no idea. So when someone comes to me complaining of insomnia, I rule out everything else first, and then my official diagnosis is ‘insomnia.’ That’s all there is to it. Some people just can’t sleep. You’re part of the small percentage of people who have it so severely that you’ll stay awake for days unless you have something to help you sleep.”
Manwhore makes a great point. To anyone (not you Dakrat, I know what you were saying) who doesn’t think sleep deprivation is torture, I implore you to try doing it. Here’s the challenge: wake up for work on Friday, then don’t sleep until Sunday night. See if you can do it. Get your wife or husband or a friend to keep prodding you to stay awake. And you’re not allowed to use stimulants like NoDoz or coffee or anything. Just stay awake for three days, then see if you have the ability to string two coherent sentences together.
Let me put it this way. I would be more sober if I drank a fifth of bourbon than I would not sleeping for three days.
When I think OCD and insomnia I think anxiety. OCD is an anxiety disorder and nothing makes me sleepless like anxiety. I used to take Effexor for anxiety, but I had to stop. Wellbutrin is supposed to be effective for anxiety, but my doc won’t subscribe it because I get all of the “rare and unusual” side effects of psy drugs and she is afraid of seizures.
John, if I may chase you from the other thread, I have a question I’d like to ask. Also it’s relevant for the other people who do not see a problem in the current US interrogation/imprisonment/rendition etc etc
There are 2 facts I’d like to hear your opinion on.
1. We know for a fact that some people have been imprisoned by mistake.
2. We know for a fact that people have been tortured. Some to insanity, some to death.
Do you ignore these in your thinking because:
a) you didn’t know these facts.
or
b) you don’t believe these facts.
or
c)imprisoning potentially innocent people, and torture are necessary in this war on terror
or is there a different reason? I don’t get why for you these facts make no difference to your arguments.
I’m curious, Thrill, you ever served in the military?
Yes I have. I guess that when I was kept awake at odd hours, shouted at, and forced to stand for hours at a time during basic training, it qualified me as a torture victim. I hope that if I had not served in the military, you would probably hold that against me, which is asinine. I’m sure that you’ve never worked as a war crimes prosecutor, but it doesn’t stop you from rendering your opinion.
I’ve never said questioning detainees was off the table.
Fine. Of course, when they refuse to talk and ask for a lawyer, you have to leave it at that. Nevermind that the suspect could know information that could save hundreds of thousands of American lives. In your War on Terror strategy, we let our people die to protect the (non-existent) rights of terrorists. Why is it so hard for you to wrap your brain around the fact that many of us here think that that’s wrong?
Yes I have. I guess that when I was kept awake at odd hours, shouted at, and forced to stand for hours at a time during basic training, it qualified me as a torture victim.
I was just curious. You sounded less like a military man and more like a bad-ass mall cop who could never get hired on by a legitimate police department.
I hope that if I had not served in the military, you would probably hold that against me, which is asinine.
Nope. But it would have explained a lot.
Fine. Of course, when they refuse to talk and ask for a lawyer, you have to leave it at that
Who the hell said that? Look, I’ve said a thousand times that we don’t need to extend full US Constitutional protections to these guys, but we need something legitimate.
Nevermind that the suspect could know information that could save hundreds of thousands of American lives.
You know, when a cop pulls a woman over for speeding, there’s a chance that she might have information which could save hundreds or thousands of lives. Perhaps, for every violation whatsoever, the police should routinely torture people. You know, for the sake of safety. Who knows what evil is lurking in the minds of people that the police routinely interact with? My God, that guy they just gave the jaywalking ticket to might be a serial child molester. Better take him down to the precinct and stick him in the deep freeze for a few days and see if he cracks. You know, for the safety of children. And that guy who got a ticket for littering, he might be running the largest meth lab in the state. Better take him down to the precinct, keep him awake for 72 hours, see what he has to say. You know, because finding a meth lab could save the lives ofd hundreds of people.
My God, I think you’re on to something here. The police should just routinely torture everyone. Holy shit, think of the intelligence we’d learn! We’d learn about every crime ever committed. With the police routinely arresting and torturing citizens, America would be a crime-free paradise!
I admit it. I was wrong. Your ideas are brilliant. You’re the savior of America. Let’s start construction on the Gulags later this week. We need to start torturing people right now, because damn, how many innocent people do you think might be injured or die if we don’t start right away?
Tell me, what secrets would you spill if I used “modified interrogation techniques” on you? Ever cheat on your taxes? Have dirty thoughts about the 13 year old girl who lives down the street? Steal office supplies from work?
The police need to know these things so they can make America the crime-free police state that it should be.
thrill,
when they refuse to talk and ask for a lawyer, you have to leave it at that
or present evidence. how can you say for sure someone is guilty without evidence? really...how?
Nevermind that the suspect could know information that could save hundreds of thousands of American lives
Do you think that torture is the best way to get that information out of the suspect?
Would you say that imprisoning innocent people indefinitely, and torture are necessary in this war on terror?
You know, when a cop pulls a woman over for speeding, there’s a chance that she might have information which could save hundreds or thousands of lives.
Nice try, however, suspects who are detained within the United States for misdemeanor offenses are fully protected by the Constitution. You know full well that your example is a ridiculous one. I’m not talking about common criminals, I’m talking about terrorism suspects who are waging war against us by targeting non-combatants. The laws that you love to regurgitate are being abused when they are applied to coddling those who would destroy everything we hold dear.
I’m not talking about common criminals, I’m talking about terrorism suspects who are waging war against us by targeting non-combatants.
There’s the magic word: SUSPECTS. For all you know we’re torturing a gas station attendant from Baghdad who happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time.
But, by all means, let’s torture people we *think* might be terrorists. That’s the way to get the average Muslim on our side.
or present evidence. how can you say for sure someone is guilty without evidence?
This is where the disconnect comes in to play. I’m not talking about finding these people guilty. Their very presence on the battlefield and their tactics make them guilty. What I’m interested in is interrogation for the purpose of gaining actionable intelligence.
Would you say that imprisoning innocent people indefinitely, and torture are necessary in this war on terror?
Imprisoning indefinitely? I’m afraid that it is necessary. We can’t just let them go and we can’t send them back to their home countries because people like you will worry that they’ll be tortured. As for us performing “torture”; no, I don’t think it’s necessary nor do I think that techniques such as stress positions, sleep deprivation, or waterboarding should be ruled out in extreme circumstances.
I’m not a bloodthirsty man but I do believe that these people want to hurt us in a very bad way. To me, it’s wrong to throw our lives away by applying our institutions to defend people who are devoted to annihilating those institutions and have never been protected by them before.
But, by all means, let’s torture people we *think* might be terrorists. That’s the way to get the average Muslim on our side.
No, Lee. I don’t favor the idea of randomly torturing gas station attendants. Come back to Earth, we miss you.
Guidelines are definitely needed for determining when “enhanced” interrogation techniques should be used. Frequently, these techniques could result in false confessions and other times, they could be the only method of extracting information from a highly motivated unlawful enemy combatant.
I just marvel at how you think it’s somehow better to take a man’s life as opposed to making him stand up for 10 hours. That says more about you than you know.
Guidelines are definitely needed for determining when “enhanced” interrogation techniques should be used.
Well as long as there are guidelines for torture how can I object?
If it keeps me safe from the Moslems then what’s the problem? And after I’m safe from the Moslems maybe they can use it to keep the christains safe from fags like me.
Isn’t that Anita Bryant such a sweet looking girl? Doing such good work trying to save our children too.
Well as long as there are guidelines for torture how can I object?
Every police department in the US has “guidelines” determining when deadly force may be used, yet have the police ever used it against you? In the end, common sense will win out on this issue but we clearly have to hack through a lot of emotional nonsense before we get this clarified.
No, Lee. I don’t favor the idea of randomly torturing gas station attendants. Come back to Earth, we miss you.
Dude, you have no fucking idea what you’re talking about. Read this.
Don’t you sleep safer knowing that our good friends the Syrians tortured this man for a year, despite his being completely innocent of anything? You must. He’s one-a them shifty A-rabs, and the only good A-rab is a tortured A-rab, cuz they know all ‘bout them nookyoolar bombs and such.
If it keeps me safe from the Moslems then what’s the problem? And after I’m safe from the Moslems maybe they can use it to keep the christains safe from fags like me.
Come now. As conservatives we know that government never oversteps its bounds, that it doesn’t need to be kept in check, and can always be trusted to do the right thing. You have nothing to worry about, Dear Leader will never allow harm to come to you.
Trust Dear Leader. He is wise and magnanimous.
Every police department in the US has “guidelines” determining when deadly force may be used, yet have the police ever used it against you?
Yep, a policeman can kill me if I appear threatening to him.
Yet he still doesn’t have the power to round me up and detain me indefinately and subject me to freezing temperatures with him and his buddies looking at the thermometer sticking out of my ass to make sure I don’t die. That makes for great gay porn, but lousy foreign policy.
Don’t you sleep safer knowing that our good friends the Syrians tortured this man for a year, despite his being completely innocent of anything?
So because sometimes the authorities are wrong, we should refrain from certain actions? How dangerously short-sighted of you. Despite all of the protections of our criminal justice system, innocent people are sent to prison and raped and beaten by other convicts. Their livelihoods and reputations are destroyed even when they are eventually exonerated. Do we stop imprisoning people? No. In the Syrian case you cited it certainly appears that a mistake was made with severe consequences for the suspect and someone should be held accountable. Is it also possible that extraordinary renditions have saved lives? Yes it is. We are fighting a different kind of enemy and it remains to be seen what will work best, if anything will work at all.
Yet he still doesn’t have the power to round me up and detain me indefinately and subject me to freezing temperatures with him and his buddies looking at the thermometer sticking out of my ass to make sure I don’t die.
Right. Because you are protected by the Constitution of the United States and not an unlawful enemy combatant captured by US military forces. I’d say that if you stay away from al-Qaeda training camps, your chances of getting anything stuck up your ass by an over-eager CIA agent are nil. Unless you ask him nicely.
It’s been fun. Goodnight everyone.
Because you are protected by the Constitution of the United States and not an unlawful enemy combatant captured by US military forces.
Two words: Jose Padilla. American citizen, captured on American soil. Declared an enemy combatant, stripped of his Constitutional rights.
But I’m sure that he’ll be the only one they do that too, right?
Two words: Jose Padilla
Hey, I agree with you on Padilla; the government has seriously bungled that case and the “American citizen, captured on American soil” arguments are totally valid. Still, we’re talking about what, one guy? Your chances of winning the lottery and getting run over by a Volvo driven by Elvis Presley as you leave the 7-11 after checking your ticket are better than your chances of being arrested and detained as an enemy combatant on American soil, Lee.
That said, I do believe that the system will eventually correct the Padilla case.
Whew! I’m glad that the government never oversteps its bounds. That must be some of that “new conservatism” I’m not acquainted with. You know, where it’s all torture and Jesus.
Whew! I’m glad that the government never oversteps its bounds
Of course government oversteps its bounds; it is evil by it’s very nature. Every good conservative should say this out loud once a day.
However, the federal government is charged with defending us from foreign threats and if it can’t do it, who will? Amnesty International? Jon Stewart? Bloggers?
Horrible mistakes have been made and I’m sure that many more will be made by every Administration that deals with the Islamist threat. Agents of the government will shit all over the rights of certain people to make a case sometimes and all we can do is hold our elected officials accountable for abuses.
thrill,
I’m not talking about finding these people guilty. Their very presence on the battlefield and their tactics make them guilty
how do you know they were found on the battle field, and used certain tactics?
If you cannot prove that then you agree that it’s ok to lock up innocent people, innocent US citizens, it’s a necessary evil in this “struggle for survival”. what if it was your brother, what you agree then? can you answer that honestly please?
Does it bother you ONE TINY BIT to be advocating the same methods used by the nazis, stalin and mao to name jsut a few AND to be justifying it with the same logic??
what if it was your brother? please answer that.
the federal government is charged with defending us from foreign threats
Jose Padilla. American captured on American soil. Constitutional rights wiped away by the stroke of a pen.
The fact that this could even happen ONCE should fucking terrify you. But that’s the difference between a conservative and an authoritarian.
Agents of the government will shit all over the rights of certain people to make a case sometimes and all we can do is hold our elected officials accountable for abuses.
Or we can deny them the means to abuse us in the first place.
If you cannot prove that then you agree that it’s ok to lock up innocent people, innocent US citizens, it’s a necessary evil in this “struggle for survival”.
At no time during our conversation have I been talking about US citizens. Where did you get that idea?
Does it bother you ONE TINY BIT to be advocating the same methods used by the nazis, stalin and mao to name jsut a few AND to be justifying it with the same logic??
Nobody likes to be the one suggesting ugly measures that history may frown on, that’s for sure. However, if you want to use historical examples, I could point out that Stalin could have used Lincoln as his inspiration for jailing and deporting political enemies. Your point really doesn’t mean anything at all.
Of course government oversteps its bounds; it is evil by it’s very nature. Every good conservative should say this out loud once a day.
And you are happy they have the right to make you disappear into a prison camp!!!! are you for real?
Orwell talked about this ability of people to have two contradicting ideas and believe both are true at the same time - that is what you are doing. I see it with people here in china too.
read these words below slowly, is there a little twinge of worry, or something not quite right?
“My goverment can pick me or my family up, without giving me or anyone a reason, torture us to insanity or death in one of their prison camps, or just leave us to rot. As a conservative, I support the current - and any future - government having these powers, and I will defend and support the governments right to do this to me.”
Can you say that thrill and everything feels ok???
thrill - if it was your brother - would you support his imprisonment wihtout trial?
if it was your cousin in australia? taken from there to the camps.
answer that one.
Or we can deny them the means to abuse us in the first place
How do you plan to do that, Lee? The government has always had the means to abuse. They have the bigger guns. Citizens have always been reactive when it comes to government oppression.
The government can snoop into your bank account, garnish your paycheck at will, seize your house, throw you out onto the street with nothing but the clothes on your back, and still hit you with fines and jail time for breaking tax law. It’s weird for me to hear you people complaining about civil rights abuses in the War on Terror. I thought that the IRS tore the heart out of American civil rights decades ago.
Australia is not a war zone. Keep trying.
The government has always had the means to abuse. They have the bigger guns. Citizens have always been reactive when it comes to government oppression.
The government can snoop into your bank account, garnish your paycheck at will, seize your house, throw you out onto the street with nothing but the clothes on your back, and still hit you with fines and jail time for breaking tax law.
Jesus H. Christ, are you this fucking stupid? Every power of government you listed above is checked by the judicial and legislative branches, at both the state and federal levels. You have Constitutional rights and these are protected at all costs.
Now, if you’re designated an enemy combatant (and the president can do this at will with the stroke of a pen—no oversight needed) you have no rights. Your Constitutional rights are revoked. You can’t hire a lawyer. You can be tortured.
This is the problem, you fucking dolt. This country was founded on the principle of checks and balances. We have empowered the president to declare the rights of citizens null and void. There is no check or balance on this power.
Like I said, I’m a conservative, you’re an authoritarian.
My goverment can pick me or my family up, without giving me or anyone a reason, torture us to insanity or death in one of their prison camps, or just leave us to rot. As a conservative, I support the current - and any future - government having these powers, and I will defend and support the governments right to do this to me.”
No, kiddo, I don’t agree with that statement and I have no idea what led you to believe that I do. I have stated here within the past hour that I believe that the government’s actions against Padilla were a mistake. What more could you want?
This is the problem, you fucking dolt. This country was founded on the principle of checks and balances. We have empowered the president to declare the rights of citizens null and void. There is no check or balance on this power.
Wrong as usual, you mentally-ill fuck nugget. The Constitution is always supreme and there is always a check on presidential power. Presidents have used military force against assemblies of US citizens, forcibly removed Indian tribes from their lands, suspended habeas corpus, deported political opponents, interned Japanese-American citizens without due process, and used the IRS to audit people with whom they disagree. These actions must be done within the Constitution or the president can face impeachment or the Supreme Court can declare the acts unconstitutional. How far up your ass is your head that you can’t see that we have frequently gone to the brink of dictatorship and still stepped away each time? You’re not conservative, you are clueless.
I have stated here within the past hour that I believe that the government’s actions against Padilla were a mistake. What more could you want?
An admission that Padilla wasn’t a mistake, he was the inevitable outcome of these new imperial powers granted the executive.
20 years from now Jose Padilla will be remembered in the history books not for his terrorist ties, but because he was the first of many American citizens to be stripped of their Constitutional rights by a sitting president.
The Constitution is always supreme and there is always a check on presidential power.
You need to read the actual Woo and Gonzales arguments which led to this. (I realize they be all legal-like and stuff, but you can read the big words more’n once.) Their argument is that in wartime neither the legislative or judicial branches have any power whatsoever to check the executive.
Didn’t know that did ya, fuckhole?
he was the inevitable outcome of these new imperial powers granted the executive.
If you firmly believe that (and I doubt you even know what you believe at this point), then what you should do is craft a letter to your heroine, Speaker Pelosi, and insist that impeachment proceedings against President Bush be launched on all of the grounds you have been spewing at us for the past year. Post the copy of the letter on this blog and show us how serious you are, motherfucker.
need to read the actual Woo and Gonzales arguments which led to this.
That’s just it; they’re arguments. The Administration can contend anything that it wants to. If it breaks the law, Congress can impeach. War or not. Did they finally do away with civics courses in CA?
I don’t support an impeachment and have said so many times. But I do think that a reasonable case for war crimes could be made against Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld.
I don’t support an impeachment and have said so many times
Then everything you have said here is pointless. Either you don’t really think that what the President is doing is illegal (which makes you a damn dirty liar) or you don’t have enough sense to actually let the system work to redress these “abuses” (which makes you a damn fool).
Call for impeachment. That would impress me and make the Muslims like you.
Australia is not a war zone. Keep trying.
so how does your imprisoned cousin let people know how was not picked up in a war zone?
you accept the government makes mistakes yes?, if your brother or cousin was picked up by mistake, are you ok with the fact they could not get out?
The key thing here is you have no way to know where the people in the camps came from. On one hand you say you don’t trust the government and they make mistakes, on the other hand you say you trust them to lock anyone they fancy up. How do you square those 2 things? it’s weird.
Csn you answer me this question
if your brother was picked up and put into a camp by mistake, is it right that he has no chance to prove his innocence?
and what do you think should be done to stop another padilla?
and what do you think should be done to stop another padilla?
Since that’s the most coherent thing you’ve asked me, I’ll address it. I think that federal prosecutors should follow the same guidelines they did to put McVeigh on Death Row. Padilla’s detention was improper and I have no doubt that future court decisions will validate that view.
I’ll have to pick this up again later. Arguing with an insomniac who is two time zones behind me is not a winning prospect.
but you won’t address the issue of your poor cousin, in prison camp, unable to tell them he was not in a war zone?
coward.
tell me that wouldn’t happen, i’ll quote you in saying “i accept the government makes mistakes”.
One of the interesting things about this debate is how far people will actually go to support torturing people with the only evidence being based on the governments word and thorough use of fear. I’m convinced that the only reason that many of these people are “republicans” is that this was the party that indoctrinated them first and if it were the liberals then they would be the polar opposite to what they are now (in other words, they are sheep)
I never -really- understood how nazi Germany descended into the monster that it became with the sometimes silent support of its citizens when carrying out atrocities such as kristallnacht, but we see here that with a bit of fear and propoganda (constant use of a medium to convey a message) you really can convince alot of people to support your crazy ideas if you project the idea that if these policies aren’t carried out then you will be attacked again.
but you won’t address the issue of your poor cousin, in prison camp, unable to tell them he was not in a war zone?
coward.
tell me that wouldn’t happen, i’ll quote you in saying “i accept the government makes mistakes”.
Ok, so in your massive theoretical world, my cousin somehow gets detained as a terrorism suspect...in Australia...which is a war zone now, apparently; and you want me to tell you that it wouldn’t happen. Fine. It wouldn’t happen. The odds of it happening are non-existent. My cousin has better odds of being struck by lightning, surviving, and writing a book about the experience which will then be featured on “Oprah” than being arrested as a terrorist in Australia. I managed to sleep just fine last night without worrying about it happening. Thank you for calling.
He has turned Iraq, literally, into the world’s largest terrorist training academy. Our “war on terror” has turned into “Terrorist University.”
I don’t know if Iraq has exactly, but Guantanamo Bay is a mistake which has been made before.
We used to have internment without trial in NI, and it is regarded as having spectacularly backfired. The Long Kesh prison where most internees were held is still known locally as the University of Terror, because a good proportion of the people held were moderate, with just enough real bad apples to rot the lot by the time they were released.
The repetition of history is scary. It didn’t work in the 70’s, no matter how much I understand where the government of the time were coming from, and it won’t work now.
you really can convince alot of people to support your crazy ideas
If there’s one lesson that the history of all mankind shouts out at the top of its collective dusty, archival lungs it’s that sentence.
Kay. I have a question. 5 Britons got captured today, and more than likely are going to be handed over to some terrorist cell or another.
For arguments sake, say they are tortured in order to gain information about the allies movements and plans (this is not out of the question...). For arguments sake, they are deprived of sleep, and suffer psychological problems for the rest of their lives. One chap, with a little girl of 4 years old, and a pregnant wife at home is permanently mentally disabled from the experience, so much so that his newborn daughter never gets to know the man her mother married. Fuck it, lets say that something goes wrong, and a 50 year old faulklands war hero actually dies during interrogation.
Is this
a) The work of barbaric, evil, bloodthirsty savages; with absolutely no moral or ethical basis to their ideology; the sort of ideology we should all fight against.
or
b) Fair cop. Its a war. “These people want to hurt them in a very bad way”, so any means is fine. At least they didn’t feed their genitalia to a bear.
The point is, Thrill, that using your arguments, I can defend everything that the Terrorists do. (Does that make you a terrorist sympathizer? ;-))
Thrill, from an outsiders perspective (and I’m waiting to be declared a pinko euro liberal here) I understand that its a war, and the stakes are high and it needs to be won. But I always believed that the US military, aside from its awesome might operated with nobility, honour and dignity. I get that you need to win this war, and you can. You’re the f*cking united states of America. However if you are going to act like c*nts along the way, then you have lost my respect as a honourable military force. What price victory?
One final interesting point. In the film ‘a few good men’ - it seems like it is exploring the same debate - on what side of the fence do people fall here?
Is this
a) The work of barbaric, evil, bloodthirsty savages; with absolutely no moral or ethical basis to their ideology; the sort of ideology we should all fight against.
Yep.
Next entry: What the Founders Did
Previous entry: Verschärfte Vernehmung
Server Drive
Who's Logged In
Total Members: 4325
Total Logged in members: 4
Total guests: 73
Total anonymous users: 0
AlexinCT,
FPrefect,
Hal_10000,
InsipiD,
Capitalism
Search
Search this site with Google
Search will take you to Google.com, which will display results from Right-Thinking and link you back here. Search using pMachineRecent Comments
The Insurance Company Canard
(1 total, Last @ 09:53)
AlexinCT: Every time I hear some moron hauling off on some private sector company, be it banks, insurance companies, energy companies, or something else, I point out that whatever grievance they have was indubitably caused by government and/or someone in government. In our highly regulated society, and even more highly regulated…
You May Have Already Been Counted
(11 total, Last @ 09:42)
InsipiD: I've been noticing the fair share theme of these since they started running. Grrrr.
You May Have Already Been Counted
(11 total, Last @ 09:34)
mikedomi39: It’s not the government’s business to take a census A census is mandated by the Constitution.
You May Have Already Been Counted
(11 total, Last @ 09:07)
Ed Kline: How about this...It's not the government's business to take a census. I wont cooperate at all. I never have.
You May Have Already Been Counted
(11 total, Last @ 06:27)
Hal_10000: I don't watch much TV, so I haven't seen the commercials. They are an abomiation. The Census Bureau head is an Obama appointee and his nomination was somewhat controversial as he has, i the past, advocated making statistical corrections to the Census to account for lower minority participation. That's not…
Last 30 Comments
Part of me agrees with this, but part of me thinks the pottery barn rule applies, you break it - you own it.
The problem is there is going to be death and destruction by staying in Iraq and death and destruction by leaving; I am unsure which of these will be of a higher magnitude.