Rayn: PLACE HEAD IN SAND, AND REPEAT AFTER ME: Those who don’t agree with Obama’s policies are OBVIOUSLY just racist.
“Yes we kill. Yes we torture in Guantanamo. Yes we massacre in Pakistan. Yes we bomb in Afghanistan.”
Jason R.: What about Mitt Romney?
Charles C.: but how come the “terrorist” get better lawyers then regular amaricans
Rayn: I won’t hesitate to verbally tar and feather that Death-Worshiping mummy, either, Jason, if he becomes a serious enough threat. He’s just ANOTHER War Pig, foaming at the mouth for murder. He and O-bomb-a are guilty, and the blood of the innocent is on their hands, along with any who support them. I will not be led by the Cains of this world – nor the Barabbas’, nor the Shauls. Let THEIR sons follow after them, and let the dead bury the dead.
I’m not sure that I would classify their legal representation as “better,”Charles… Many of America’s “terrorist” suspects have been treated in ways that are technically considered WAR-CRIMES by the standards of Human Rights – and EVEN, as defined by the Geneva Convention! And, this has happened under both Bush and O-bomb-a’s administrations.
(Tom Parker) It feels like we have been here before. Another testosterone-fueled memoir from a charter member of President Bush’s torture team unapologetically seeks to justify the unjustifiable with inflated claims of attacks thwarted and secret battles won.
Latest to the plate is Jose Rodriguez, former Head of the CIA’s National Clandestine Service, and the man charged with implementing the application of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) to detainees that fell into the CIA’s clutches after 9/11.
Rodriguez was not always quite so willing to boast about his handiwork. In 2005 he destroyed 92 videotapes of high value detainees Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri being water-boarded at secret CIA prisons in Thailand.
(Eva Illouz) Discrimination is the sophisticated, less blunt, distant cousin of racism. It has the same effects as racism − ranking people by birth − without, necessarily, the same intentions, which is why discrimination is mostly and most often an invisible mechanism. This is also the reason why some legal provisions suggest evaluating discrimination on the basis of facts. But facts alone do not scrutinize the mindset of people working in organizations. If, for example, women represent 50 percent of the population, Arabs and Mizrahim constitute 60 percent of the population and if all three groups have almost never been represented among the rectors, presidents and deans, or been recipients of scientific awards of Israeli universities, we need not enter the minds of the people who make these decisions to suspect discrimination. The proof is in the famous pudding.
My Commentary: Discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, religion, etc… IS PURE FALLACY! Why do some countries get a free pass to engage in this disgusting behavior, while others are outright condemned? :sigh: Critical thinking is at an all-time low in this world.