Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla
I reckon we are having our successes, quietly. I don't think we should be interrupting them.
|
UG precedes that quote by claiming he was privy to secret successes. Then he *speculates* that torture results in useful information. For all his privy access, he really does not know? In the next sentence, he converts total speculation into a fact - then uses that 'fact' to justify torture.
Barak used this exact same logic to 'play the white boys'.
Urbane Guerrilla cannot answer and completely sidesteps two simple questions:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dar512
Give me a specific case where the mistreatment of these prisoners has had the direct result of drawing the conflict in Afghanistan or Iraq to a positive conclusion. Then I might agree that the word is 'stymie'. However I will never agree that torture of a human being is worth 'stymieing'.
|
and
Quote:
Originally Posted by dar512
Ah. So we should torture the enemy so that we can protect our American freedom? Would that be the freedom to threaten to torture me? Or would that be my freedom of speech that you would like to curtail by threatening me?
|
Urbane Guerrilla is asked these questions repeatedly. UG avoids answering these questions repeatedly by attacking the questioner.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla
It would seem obvious that you could spin things like that so long as the fighting in Afghanistan is still going on.
|
How ironic. UG's responses are typical of a conspiring terrorist trying to hide his complicity. Even Barak did not resort to deceit.
UG - dar512 asked you two simple questions. Why not answer him with honesty? Is honesty that difficult - especially when it might contradict a political agenda? Answer his questions without political accusations. His questions are simple. Why can Urbane Guerrilla not answer dar512’s questions? Why must UG attack the messenger?