FOX News

[TK-8252]

Libertarian? Then surely you would support the 2nd amendment and the legalization of drugs/prostitution?

 

Of course.

[Good Sir Knight]

Cool, something we can agree on. The drugs/prostitution thing for me is in principal of course, I don't think I'd want to legalize meth but...you get the drift.

 

But yeah, FoxNews has been very outspoken in their disdain for Bush's immigration policy so... I wouldn't go so far as to say they toe the Bush line absolutely.

 

They didn't like one of his picks for the supreme court either...I don't think any body did.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Oh my cowards argument, boo hoo. Mr. Eagle, I do hope that your friends in Gitmo are being tortured with Brian Adams and ACDC.

 

I bet they scream to drown out the sound, not loud enough though.

What about just addressing it instead of... That:confused:?

 

It's got to be a great feeling, though, to hope someone's getting tortured. It's probably not good for rational thinking, to harbour that much hatred.

 

Reminds me of the bigotted fellow in 12 Angry Men who wanted to "pull the switch" [Hint: Electric chair] of the murder suspect himself. And we all know how well he reasoned...

 

And, since you obviously ignore the Guantanamo thread, here's a little document that does cover the Guantanamo internees, who are, after all, "members of the human family" - regardless of how "cowardly" they are:rolleyes:: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 5, in particular, interests me.

 

Not that you care less about their rights, of course, I've long since realized that the "they have no rights"-refrain of the right-wing is just a shield to keep from debating whether or not the detainees should be tortured.

 

I never said you couldn't, I'm just laughing because you base your entire opinion (of thousands of people) on one little poll.

Seven.

 

And I can ensure you that those seven polls combined do cover "thousands of people".

[CapNColostomy]

Why would anyone be dumb enough to trust any media outlet over another, or government for that matter? I don't care where you get your news from, it's controlled by money, which is synonomous with it's controlled by big business, which is synonomous with it's controlled by someones government, which is synonomous with it's bull**** more often than not.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Why would anyone be dumb enough to trust any media outlet over another[...]

Because one has been proven to be very biased and untruthful, whereas the other...

[Good Sir Knight]

Reminds me of the bigotted fellow in 12 Angry Men who wanted to "pull the switch" [Hint: Electric chair] of the murder suspect himself. And we all know how well he reasoned...

 

Yes and being exceedingly pro-Palestinian I'm sure you can understand why they avoid the Israeli military and blow up civilians. To each his own.

 

 

And, since you obviously ignore the Guantanamo thread, here's a little document that does cover the Guantanamo internees, who are, after all, "members of the human family" - regardless of how "cowardly" they are:rolleyes:: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 5, in particular, interests me.

 

Cry me a river. I don't think the Gitmo detainees are being tortured in the classical sense, in order to extract data from a detainee you need to make him feel uncomfortable and it's a far cry compared to most other governments.

 

You just don't hear about it because America is the new bad guy apparently.

 

Again I don't care about the detainees, I don't think detainees are harmed physically on a broad scale but I certainly wish they were.

 

 

And I can ensure you that those seven polls combined do cover "thousands of people".

 

Yeah and it's all from the same organization. Where's the data behind it? You don't have the data behind it and you don't care because you agree.

 

They're judging people's responses based upon what they believe is going on in Iraq, just their opinion and they may be smart people but not that smart.

 

Again you don't mind because you can agree with it, only natural.

[TK-8252]

Besides Abu Ghraib, this is a good example of what could very well be going on at GITMO.

 

The most disturbing part of that scandal is this:

 

"It would be many months before Army investigators learned a final horrific detail: Most of the interrogators had believed Mr. Dilawar was an innocent man who simply drove his taxi past the American base at the wrong time."

 

So an innocent taxi driver at the wrong place at the wrong time gets pulled off the street and ends up tortured, beaten, and murdered in a U.S. prison. And it will happen again. It very well might be happening right now.

 

And so what happens to the interrogators who tortured and murdered this innocent taxi driver?

 

Most of them got a fine and a slap on the wrist. Absolutely amazing.

 

Justice in the military is a joke. Every single one of these interrogators - even the ones who didn't even strike the man but just KNEW it was going on - should have been put in front of a firing squad.

[Good Sir Knight]

Justice in the military is a joke. Every single one of these interrogators - even the ones who didn't even strike the man but just KNEW it was going on - should have been put in front of a firing squad.

 

Your justice is a joke. You just eliminated any shred of credibility you had with that statement. You didn't even bring up the possiblity of a trial, something you would readily afford suspected terrorists that are not US citizens and do not come from a true military (no papers, no uniform).

[TK-8252]

Your justice is a joke. You just eliminated any shred of credibility you had with that statement. You didn't even bring up the possiblity of a trial, something you would readily afford suspected terrorists.

 

They DID have a trial, something that the innocent Afghan taxi driver didn't get before he was tortured and murdered. Do you have no sympathy for this man?? Did you read the entire article? The interrogators got off with a slap on the wrist. It should have been execution.

 

Every time something like this happens it feeds right into the hands of terrorists for propaganda and recruiting purposes. I say lock these soldiers up for being traitors... they're working for the enemy.

[Good Sir Knight]

Do you have no sympathy for this man??

 

Sure I do, if his story is true. There will always be mistakes in a war TK, there will always be innocents lossed...always have always will.

 

I think firing squad for the soldiers is a bit harsh given the offence, surely you can agree.

 

Would you support the firing squad for detainees if they were found guilty? I don't think you would because most of the civilized world hates capital punishment.

 

People might call you a fascist American

 

I say lock these soldiers up for being traitors... they're working for the enemy.

 

I thought you wanted to shoot them? Oh and I'd never advocate firing squad for these detainees, I want them to languish under our mercy while eating ethnicaly sensitive foods.

[TK-8252]

Yes there will be atrocities in war... but this wasn't an accident. A pilot who bombs a wedding party after being given intelligence that it's an insurgent warehouse shouldn't be prosecuted. Not his fault. But intentionally torturing and beating a man who you KNOW is innocent until he dies, just for the fun of it... you really can't find a lower form of life.

 

But I'm torn on the death penalty. On one hand I sure as hell don't want to see innocent people executed. I don't trust the government with the power to legally kill someone in something other than self-defense. However, some crimes are just so heinous that in certain instances, like this taxi driver's case, I just want to be able to say "good riddance." Perhaps I'm hypocritical in this way.

 

I'm against the death penalty in civilian courts... not because I don't think it fits the crime, but because I don't think the government should have the power to execute its own citizens. There have been innocent people executed on death row, and as long as we have an imperfect justice system, there will continue to be innocents executed.

 

Military courts though are different, because soldiers must be held to a higher standard than civilians. Every time a soldier mistreats an Afghan or an Iraqi it hurts America in the worst possible way. That's traitorous.

[toms]

I wouldn't trust any one news outlet EXCLUSIVELY.. however there are some that i'd trust more than others. The Sun, for example.. i'd almost never trust. Fox and the Daily Mail I might trust - with some verification.

[Good Sir Knight]

Military courts though are different, because soldiers must be held to a higher standard than civilians. Every time a soldier mistreats an Afghan or an Iraqi it hurts America in the worst possible way. That's traitorous.

 

So you're all for military tribunals? Me too.

 

It's too bad that the supreme court in all it's wisdom decided that enemy combatants deserve the same legal system afforded to our citizens.

 

A shame... quite a shame.

 

 

Every time a soldier mistreats an Afghan or an Iraqi it hurts America in the worst possible way. That's traitorous.

 

It hurts America because there is a bias against America, especially in the middle east.

 

There is simply no other 'occupying' force in the history of the middle east that has treated the 'local population' as good as the US Military.

 

There will always be mistakes, do you think the US Military just likes to see people suffer?

 

Give me a break, we're too merciful in my opinion and that's interpreted as a weakness in that savage part of the world.

[TK-8252]

So you're all for military tribunals? Me too.

 

It's too bad that the supreme court in all it's wisdom decided that enemy combatants deserve the same legal system afforded to our citizens.

 

A shame... quite a shame.

 

That decision was a disappointment to me, but what I don't understand is why the GITMO guys can't just be tried in either the country they were found in, or the country they're from.

 

It hurts America because there is a bias against America, especially in the middle east.

 

That's right. And the best way we can fight that bias is by proving that it's not true.

 

There is simply no other 'occupying' force in the history of the middle east that has treated the 'local population' as good as the US Military.

 

Perhaps, but that's because the U.S. military is the best in the world... at least it was before Iraqnam.

 

There will always be mistakes, do you think the US Military just likes to see people suffer?

 

NO, of course not, except for a few select individuals such as the Abu Ghraib folks...

 

Give me a break, we're too merciful in my opinion and that's interpreted as a weakness in that savage part of the world.

 

The last thing that Middle Eastern wackos think of us is that we're merciful. I think we should be merciful though. That's what makes us better than those savages.

[TK-8252]

On the topic of Faux News, check this clip out...

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XEuKg4vCK0s

 

Sean Hannity making a dumbass of himself... as usual...

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Yes and being exceedingly pro-Palestinian I'm sure you can understand why they avoid the Israeli military and blow up civilians.

Understanding is one thing. Supporting it - which it for some obscure reason it seems you imply I am ( ) - is another.

 

I don't think the Gitmo detainees are being tortured in the classical sense

And I don't think there are US troops in Iraq. Never mind all the evidence to the contrary - I don't support Operation Iraqi Freedom, so I don't think it exists. And even if it did, the US "army" doesn't fit my private definition of "army" [Crawls back under rock].

 

[...] in order to extract data from a detainee you need to make him feel uncomfortable [...]

Fallacy. It's true that there needs to be some discomfort involved, but it does not follow that said discomfort needs to be at torture-level.

[...] and it's a far cry compared to most other governments.

Sigh. Keep re-stating arguments that have already been refuted. See how much I care.

 

There will always be mistakes in a war TK, there will always be innocents lossed...always have always will.

You're starting to remind me of a low-rate TV channel. Nothing new, only re-runs.

 

Give me some new arguments, or address our replies to the ones you've already given. Don't just re-state them.

 

Give me a break, we're too merciful in my opinion and that's interpreted as a weakness in that savage part of the world.

The old "US mercy"-argument again?

 

I agree, it's sending a very poor message to the Middle East. Let's get tougher.

 

OK, so torture in direct violation of Human Rights granted to "all members of the human family" is a sign of mercy and weakness. Pre-emptively invading a sovereign country in violation of the UN and the whole world on the basis of lies is weakness. Using napalm and carpet-bombing residential areas is a sign of weakness. The PATRIOT ACT, which overrides several amendments in the Constitution,

 

Yeah, how meek and gentle the Republican Party is. But what are we going to do to get this "toughness" message across? I suggest we drop an atomic bomb on Baghdad!

 

...No, wait, just one bomb when we have 10 000+ and can drop them all... Nah, American mercy again. Sends a message of weakness...

 

Hmmm... I'll get back to you. Don't worry, I'll think of something.

 

Seriously, though, do you have any idea of how effective a recruitment tool the Guantanamo Torture is for the terrorists? Carol Boggert, Associate Director of Human Rights Watch, deems it "the #1 recruitment tool for the terrorists". And she's just one of many. 'Cause here's a newsflash: No one likes to hear that their comrades are being tortured. It's not a good diplomatic tool.

 

You think the terrorists hit WTC on 9/11 because America's been too nice in the past? I do not. If you do, please quote one terrorist stating otherwise. One.

 

It hurts America because there is a bias against America, especially in the middle east.

So if foreigners are appaled, it's not because it's wrong, but because there's a bias against the States.

 

There will always be mistakes, do you think the US Military just likes to see people suffer?

Are you saying they're somehow more than human? 'Cause yes, a lot of humans, even American soldiers, enjoy to see people suffer. The torture in Abu Grahib is evidence enough of that to me.

 

Humans are evil, plain and simple. And US soldiers are, like it or not, humans.

[Good Sir Knight]

Understanding is one thing. Supporting it - which it for some obscure reason it seems you imply I am ( ) - is another.

 

Dagobahn, I don't believe you or your flimsy evidence from biased organizations and think tanks, give it a rest.

 

Even if they were really being tortured there, I'd be half mad at best.

 

And I don't think there are US troops in Iraq. Never mind all the evidence to the contrary - I don't support Operation Iraqi Freedom, so I don't think it exists. And even if it did, the US "army" doesn't fit my private definition of "army" [Crawls back under rock].

 

Much more of an army than the Norwegian military, bigger than the entire thing really. That might make you feel like I'm being yet another cocky American but it's a fact.

 

For your information, the US Army is very much in Iraq.

 

 

Fallacy. It's true that there needs to be some discomfort involved, but it does not follow that said discomfort needs to be at torture-level.Sigh. Keep re-stating arguments that have already been refuted. See how much I care.

 

Again this is your view point, this is how you and the organizations you agree with define torture.

 

Any allegations of torture are taken very seriously by the US Government and we have people in jail due to the HANDFUL of embarassments in Iraq. A handful of incidents when hundreds of thousands of US Soldiers have served in Iraq with dignity, respect and bravery.

 

Know your source.

 

You're starting to remind me of a low-rate TV channel. Nothing new, only re-runs.

 

Ya know I was about to say the same thing about you. I'm expecting to hear any minute now that Bush lied and he controls the media.

 

You need to diversify your sources my friend, America is not the empire you want it to be.

 

 

The old "US mercy"-argument again?

 

Well at least I know my population wasn't complicit in the wholescale slaughter of Jewish people just 60 years ago. Sure it wasn't the US's reason for going to war but it wasn't going on in our backyard. Often times Nazi occupied territories saw their own people rounding up and in some cases killing jews.

 

This was just a short while back.

 

I agree, it's sending a very poor message to the Middle East. Let's get tougher.

Terrorism is the use of violence against civilians to foment political/religious change in a given society. One can see this process in action if he looks back at the Madrid bombings, Islamic terrorism won big time that day and sighed a breath of relief.

 

They're still under threat by the way, capitulation is a hallmark of European history.

 

 

Yeah, how meek and gentle the Republican Party is. But what are we going to do to get this "toughness" message across? I suggest we drop an atomic bomb on Baghdad!

 

If any nukes go off in the Middle East they'll be in Tehran of Tel Aviv. My bet is that Iran is going to be nuked and it's going to happen sooner than people think.

 

 

Seriously, though, do you have any idea of how effective a recruitment tool the Guantanamo Torture is for the terrorists?

 

Abu Ghraib was one incident that was wrong and indecent, one mistake. Gitmo is a different story, I haven't heard of anything I and others in my camp would define as torture.

 

The media that you read and listen to sensationalizes this. They make it seem like it's an institutionalized thing. They're polarized and they don't want to see America succeed in the middle east.

 

 

Carol Boggert, Associate Director of Human Rights Watch

 

Wow another biased organization.

 

 

You think the terrorists hit WTC on 9/11 because America's been too nice in the past? I do not. If you do, please quote one terrorist stating otherwise. One.

 

911 happened because OBL was huffy about the presence of US troops on 'holy' soil.

 

He responds by attacking American interests and one can assume, emboldened by Clinton's pathetic resolve and lack of common sense.

 

So if foreigners are appaled, it's not because it's wrong, but because there's a bias against the States.

 

Yes there is a bias against the United States and we all know that a 'bias' is a bad thing because the world is not black and white.

 

 

Humans are evil, plain and simple. And US soldiers are, like it or not, humans.

 

The US Military, as an occupier, is the most professional, respectful and humanitarian fighting force the middle east has ever seen. Arguably the world.

[Jae Onasi]

 

And I don't think there are US troops in Iraq. Never mind all the evidence to the contrary - I don't support Operation Iraqi Freedom, so I don't think it exists. And even if it did, the US "army" doesn't fit my private definition of "army" [Crawls back under rock].

 

 

Tell that to my husband, Jimbo, who served on active duty for 18 months in the US Army.

 

You're too good a debater to resort to that kind of statement.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I thought it would be abundantly clear that I was being sarcastic:o. Of course the US invaded and occupies Iraq. Of course it's an Army.

 

What I'm trying to get across is that changing definitions (ie. "Torture") and failing to acknowledge outright facts (ie. people are being tortured in Guantanamo) is not a good way of debating. It's as fallacious as me re-defining "occupation", "invasion", "war", and "army" (which I don't!) to deny the existance of Operation Iraqi Freedom, simply because I don't like it.

 

The definition of torture is old, from before the US torture at Guantanamo, and the right-wing didn't seem to have much of a problem with it. Then when the Guantanamo prison guards are caught red-handed at it, with orders from above, suddenly the right-wings go "oh, that's your definition of torture" and suddenly the definition is changed.

 

Just out of curiousity, what is "your camp's" definition of torture anyway?

 

Wow, another biased source.

Everyone who speaks up on something is biased by definition. Good luck finding an objective person with an opinion. Don't look at whether or not they're biased, look at whether or not they're credible.

 

As for the statement, I can't for the life of me understand why you disagree with it. Are you saying that the Middle-Easterners are so macho and hard-skinned that they think torture is OK? Guess again (newsflash: They don't like being tortured, bombed, and occupied, even "mildly"). Are you saying that everyone else in the world thinks the torture is acceptable? Think again (most of the world looks at Guantanamo as a Hell-hole).

 

What exactly are you implying when you say that the Guantanamo torture is not used as a recruitment tool by the US's enemies?

 

Well at least I know my population wasn't complicit in the wholescale slaughter of Jewish people just 60 years ago. Sure it wasn't the US's reason for going to war but it wasn't going on in our backyard. Oftentimes Nazi occupied territories saw their own people rounding up and in some cases killing jews.

 

This was just a short while back.

I don't see what that disgrace of old has to do with the level of US military mercy? If you're implying that I can't speak up because of what a small number of my country's grandparent generation did, I beg to differ.

 

Yes there is a bias against the United States and we all know that a 'bias' is a bad thing because the world is not black and white.

Read my post again. I didn't say there isn't a bias against the USA. I'm saying that it's not the bias that's causing the resentment against the torture in Guantanamo. Trust me, they'd be against it if it was the UK or Canadians doing it.

 

I'm sure that it's convenient, given America's history of being hated, to just pull the Anti-Americans card when attacked for something, but in this case it just does not fly.

 

Terrorism is the use of violence against civilians to foment political/religious change in a given society. One can see this process in action if he looks back at the Madrid bombings, Islamic terrorism won big time that day and sighed a breath of relief.

How's that a reply to what I posted:confused:?

 

[...] Capitulation is a hallmark of European history.

Not only can I not see where that came from (it doesn't seem to be related to anything discussed here), it's also dead wrong and pretty much only a flame.

[Jae Onasi]

I thought it would be abundantly clear that I was being sarcastic:o. Of course the US invaded and occupies Iraq. Of course it's an Army.

 

No, actually, it wasn't clear. I'm not entirely familiar with your writing style at this time and without facial cues, sarcasm is hard to carry off.

 

I haven't been to Gitmo to find out if there's torture there, have you? Anything we say is guesses and speculation at best, and rumor-mongering at worst. We don't have enough hard facts to know the truth, and the only people who do aren't talking in public.

 

I suspect the truth is somewhere in between the 'nothing bad's happening at all' and 'OMG, they're being tortured right and left!' Fights happen in jails all the time, and the people who are at Gitmo right now are enemy combattants/POWs/nom du jour. They're people who've fought in battle. I don't expect them to be complacent pacifist good little boys 100% of the time when they've been soldiers. I even expect to see them try to fight their captors and each other. And I expect most of our soldiers to be professionals and treat them with some respect, but I recognize that if a fight breaks out, our soldiers are going to act. I also understand that a lot of our soldiers are passionate about protecting our country, and they aren't going to put up with any crap from prisoners. Some of them are even going to go overboard in their desire to protect their fellow soldiers and their country.

So, if there's torture going on, I doubt there's much of it. And any allegations of torture need to be investigated, and if it's happening, dealt with appropriately

[Good Sir Knight]

No, actually, it wasn't clear. I'm not entirely familiar with your writing style at this time and without facial cues, sarcasm is hard to carry off.

 

I haven't been to Gitmo to find out if there's torture there, have you? Anything we say is guesses and speculation at best, and rumor-mongering at worst. We don't have enough hard facts to know the truth, and the only people who do aren't talking in public.

 

I suspect the truth is somewhere in between the 'nothing bad's happening at all' and 'OMG, they're being tortured right and left!' Fights happen in jails all the time, and the people who are at Gitmo right now are enemy combattants/POWs/nom du jour. They're people who've fought in battle. I don't expect them to be complacent pacifist good little boys 100% of the time when they've been soldiers. I even expect to see them try to fight their captors and each other. And I expect most of our soldiers to be professionals and treat them with some respect, but I recognize that if a fight breaks out, our soldiers are going to act. I also understand that a lot of our soldiers are passionate about protecting our country, and they aren't going to put up with any crap from prisoners. Some of them are even going to go overboard in their desire to protect their fellow soldiers and their country.

So, if there's torture going on, I doubt there's much of it. And any allegations of torture need to be investigated, and if it's happening, dealt with appropriately

 

 

Ah yes an honest appraisal of the situation, of course Dagobahn is still convinced that the sky is falling and that America is on par with dictatorships throughout history.

 

When ever I go to the beach, I like to think about how free I am and how so very alone they feel, makes me warm inside.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Ah yes an honest appraisal of the situation (...)

But not a very accurate one.

 

No, actually, it wasn't clear. I'm not entirely familiar with your writing style at this time and without facial cues, sarcasm is hard to carry off.

Well, never mind, we got it sorted out:o.

 

I haven't been to Gitmo to find out if there's torture there, have you?

Nope. Neither has Cuban Red Cross, Amnesty International, or any other humanitatian organization - they are all being denied access to the camp. Ang guess what, I find that fact very telling. Of course it proves nothing (Bush's amission of and Rumsfeld's defense of torture handles that part pretty nicely), but it implies quite a lot.

 

It's funny to see how the neo-cons change their rhetoric to suit them, by the way. When Iraq barred the UN weapons inspectors, they went "oh, they're denying inspectors access, they must be guilty", then they went and invaded.

 

Then when Guantanamo becomes an issue, suddenly the "if you disallow inspections, you're guilty"-attitude of the Bushers vanishes in thin air. "So they're not allowing inspectors, so? When did that mean anything?"

 

Anything we say is guesses and speculation at best, and rumor-mongering at worst.

Nope, we've got far more than that.

We don't have enough hard facts to know the truth, and the only people who do aren't talking in public.

We have The Tipton Three for one: Three innocent British civilians. And we have soldiers from Guantanamo talking to organizations such as Human Rights Watch about oppression at Guantanamo. We've even got Rumsfeld himself defending torture ("what's so wrong about standing up for a few hours? I stand at my desk.").

 

It's more than enough to warrant suspicion, don't you agree?

 

They're people who've fought in battle. I don't expect them to be complacent pacifist good little boys 100% of the time when they've been soldiers. I even expect to see them try to fight their captors and each other. And I expect most of our soldiers to be professionals and treat them with some respect, but I recognize that if a fight breaks out, our soldiers are going to act.

Yup, and not only then.

 

I suggest you read up on the thread. We've posted links to numerous articles and sites that prove there's not only torture, but Bush-approved torture. If I were you, I'd start with the movie I posted, "Our search for security past 9/11".

 

So, if there's torture going on, I doubt there's much of it.

If there's torture going on, and there is, then it's either going to be stopped, or it's going to escalate. I've got 34 years of Amnesty research behind me on that one. Torture cannot be controlled more than a tornado or avalanche can.

 

And any allegations of torture need to be investigated, and if it's happening, dealt with appropriately

I agree. And since you've apparently got nothing to hide, here's how to end all suspicion of torture: Allow teams of observers from the Red Cross, Amnesty International, or the United Nations to go in there, stay there, and oversee the prison. If there's no torture, there's really no reason not to.

 

The moment a permanent ICRC observation unit at Guantanamo reports all's well, I'll stand down about the torture allegations (except from the accusations of torture up until the ICRC's arrival). The moment the prisoners are given fair trials, I'll stop campaigning for the articles of the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights to be followed.

 

It's really that easy. The Red Cross's an orderly bunch. We won't tear the place down, organize riots, mess up the Commander's office, or sell narcotics among to the prisoners.

 

(...) of course Dagobahn is still convinced that the sky is falling and that America is on par with dictatorships throughout history.

 

When ever I go to the beach, I like to think about how free I am and how so very alone they feel, makes me warm inside.

If you like to think that way while swimming, fine by me. I don't care less, I know it ain't so [edit: what he wrote about me, the prisoners he's probably right about].

 

I mean, what if the water's as cold as here in Norway where you live? You may need some warmth:cool:.

[toms]

When ever I go to the beach, I like to think about how free I am and how so very alone they feel, makes me warm inside.

 

You have to be pretty twisted inside to get a warm feeling from knowing that three innocent british guys were held without trial, without charges, without representation, in small cages, for 3 years, tortured and humiliated and that there are others still there, including children.

 

Maybe you should see a shrink as you seem to be displaying borderline sadist tendancies recently.

[Good Sir Knight]

Maybe you should see a shrink as you seem to be displaying borderline sadist tendancies recently.

 

Guess whats sadistic? Britains getting blown up and the Islamic community telling the government they should change their foreign policy.

 

Have fun living under Sharia toms.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Guess whats sadistic? Britains getting blown up and the Islamic community telling the government they should change their foreign policy.

Do you have to try to shift attention to something else every time you're cornered? It's getting very annoying.

 

Have fun living under Sharia toms.

Do you have anything to back up your claim of Sharia Law being a possibility in the UK?

 

PS: Who the Heck is that crying chick in your avatar?