23 May 07
Originally posted by FleabittenI see. how silly of me. thanks for letting me in on that little secret. It all makes sense now.
It's the classic end-around. If Bush plants enough stories in the media that are critical of Bush, then it won't appear as if Bush controls the media which is crtical of Bush. Those in the know know better, of course....
Can we get on to more pressing issues now, like deciding on a super secret handshake 😉
29 May 07
Originally posted by shavixmirOK, here are the facts: I served in the army during wartime. I did not torture anyone. However, i was tortured, And let me tell you it wasn't that bad. In fact i got a little rush out of it. So, lighten up on all the tourture stuff. It can be fun!
I thought there was proof that evidence through torture is more unreliable than evedince gathered through non-torture.
Can't find it though. Oh well.
EDIT: and my spelling's gone to hell too.
29 May 07
Originally posted by GascraftI believe the latest research has determined that it's unreliable. Therefore, it's useless on top of being immoral and should not be used.
I realise I am very annoying at the mo, so I'll just make it quick.
What sort of emphasis should be placed on info found through torture?
1) How reliable is it?
2) Should this info be used for important decisions?
Oh yeah.. I'm against torture fullstop..........
29 May 07
Originally posted by smw6869So you were tortured... and it wasn't "that bad"? Did they give you your testicles back in a plastic bag when they released you, or were they a little too mushed to bother? Exactly what parts of your body did they remove and force you to eat? Exactly how much wet sand did they manage to force up your rectum?
OK, here are the facts: I served in the army during wartime. I did not torture anyone. However, i was tortured, And let me tell you it wasn't that bad. In fact i got a little rush out of it. So, lighten up on all the tourture stuff. It can be fun!
Or maybe your "torture" wasn't "that bad" because it wasn't as bad as it can get?
29 May 07
Originally posted by belgianfreakDear Feakazoid: Why do you mock my experiences? And, ah, you seem to know quite a bit about torture techniques,No? Testicles? Butt Sand? Eating Body Parts? Never happened to me, but hot dang, how i wish you had been my torturer. I'm getting tingley all over dude! Wow! You mut think of these horrible acts quite often. Maybe. nah, you wouldn't really do such things under the right circumstances. Would you?
So you were tortured... and it wasn't "that bad"? Did they give you your testicles back in a plastic bag when they released you, or were they a little too mushed to bother? Exactly what parts of your body did they remove and force you to eat? Exactly how much wet sand did they manage to force up your rectum?
Or maybe your "torture" wasn't "that bad" because it wasn't as bad as it can get?
30 May 07
Originally posted by GascraftGive me half an hour alone with you and I will tell you how reliable the information is.
I realise I am very annoying at the mo, so I'll just make it quick.
What sort of emphasis should be placed on info found through torture?
1) How reliable is it?
2) Should this info be used for important decisions?
Oh yeah.. I'm against torture fullstop..........