Matt Laurer (!!!) pounds Bush on torture - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-14-2006, 12:26 PM   #61
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 04:01 PM
And I'm ashamed that people in the US (and so close to me in OH) feel that torture is ok, it's just sick. Of course our own homegrown terrorists, the Klan, did. The ends does not justify the means. We deserve all the disdain the worls heaps on us.
__________________

__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:14 PM   #62
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



you're also missing the point that torturing detainees (even if it isn't chopping off hands) makes our jobs harder, it makes it harder to win hearts and minds, it makes it harder for US troops to get crediblity in Baghdad, it makes it harder for the US to garner international support. it screws over our military and lowers our expectations for their behavior.

It seems some prominent Republicans agree with you Irvine:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14814940/

Quote:
Powell said that Congress must not pass Bush’s proposal to redefine U.S. compliance with the Geneva Conventions, a treaty that sets international standards for the treatment of prisoners of war.

This development accompanied Bush’s visit to Capitol Hill, where he conferred behind closed doors with House Republicans. His would narrow the U.S. legal interpretation of the treaty in a bid to allow tougher interrogations and shield U.S. personnel from being prosecuted for war crimes.

“The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism,” said Powell, who served under Bush and is a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk.”

Republican dissatisfaction with the administration’s security proposals is becoming more prominent as the midterm election season has arrived. The Bush White House wants Congress to approve greater executive power to spy on, imprison and interrogate terrorism suspects.
__________________

__________________
kellyahern is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:16 PM   #63
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar




This makes me wonder what world you really live in.
This one:

Let's use his behavior on March 12, 2002, for example.

Here he is introducting David Brock, a former conservative, and a newfound liberal.

"His specialy was character assassination, and throughout the 1990s he made a living as a right-wing hatchet man. But after years of lies and, some would say, malicious journalism, this Washington insider wants to clear his conscience. In his new book, Blinded by the Right, best-selling author and ex-conservative David Brock exposes how he says the GOP tried to destroy the Clinton presidency through a series of well-plotted smear campaigns."

Now that he takes on the right, he's no longer a waste of sperm.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:20 PM   #64
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
My preference is with loud music and cold rooms. I really don't prefer any such method that goes beyond that. I really hope I've made myself clear.


well, you haven't.

Bush wants much, much more than this, and you say you support Bush, and you seem to think that anyone who doesn't would like to give each terrorist a puppy.

so much more is going on than "cold rooms" and you're totally ignoring this fact and thus endorsing EVERYTHING that has happened.

i really don't have the energy to continue with this.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:22 PM   #65
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
This one:

Let's use his behavior on March 12, 2002, for example.

Here he is introducting David Brock, a former conservative, and a newfound liberal.

"His specialy was character assassination, and throughout the 1990s he made a living as a right-wing hatchet man. But after years of lies and, some would say, malicious journalism, this Washington insider wants to clear his conscience. In his new book, Blinded by the Right, best-selling author and ex-conservative David Brock exposes how he says the GOP tried to destroy the Clinton presidency through a series of well-plotted smear campaigns."

Now that he takes on the right, he's no longer a waste of sperm.
Matt, never said he was a waste of sperm. David Brock himself said he was a hachet man and he used lies...

So what's your point?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:24 PM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




well, you haven't.

Bush wants much, much more than this, and you say you support Bush, and you seem to think that anyone who doesn't would like to give each terrorist a puppy.

so much more is going on than "cold rooms" and you're totally ignoring this fact and thus endorsing EVERYTHING that has happened.

i really don't have the energy to continue with this.
I support his case on Islamic Jihad and I back him for fighting the good fight. But that doesn't mean I have to be a party hack bootlicker and agree with everything he sponsors.

I don't agree with him on the Dubai Port Deal.
I don't agree with him on open borders.
I don't agree with him on government spending.

So why do I have to agree with him on this?
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:24 PM   #67
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
This one:

Let's use his behavior on March 12, 2002, for example.

Here he is introducting David Brock, a former conservative, and a newfound liberal.

"His specialy was character assassination, and throughout the 1990s he made a living as a right-wing hatchet man. But after years of lies and, some would say, malicious journalism, this Washington insider wants to clear his conscience. In his new book, Blinded by the Right, best-selling author and ex-conservative David Brock exposes how he says the GOP tried to destroy the Clinton presidency through a series of well-plotted smear campaigns."

Now that he takes on the right, he's no longer a waste of sperm.


firstly, Brock is gay, so i hope "waste of sperm" wasn't a slur.

but, anyway, Brock himself characterizes the kind of journalism he was hired to do -- such as writing The Real Anita Hill -- was rightfully called a piece of right wing hatchet work. and there are left wing equivalents. does Laurer need to qualify this? why should he? he's talking about Brock, not talking about all kinds of hack partisan journalism.

and you'll notice the important words: "he says."

i do recommend you check out Brock's new website. it does a very good job documenting right wing bias in the mainstream media.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:26 PM   #68
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Matt, never said he was a waste of sperm. David Brock himself said he was a hachet man and he used lies...

So what's your point?
My point is obvious.

Lauer would contribute more to society if he worked for TRL.

He's a biased journalist who saw an opportunity to attack conservative views and he took it.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:27 PM   #69
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe


So why do I have to agree with him on this?
Then why were you defending him?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:27 PM   #70
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
I support his case on Islamic Jihad and I back him for fighting the good fight. But that doesn't mean I have to be a party hack bootlicker and agree with everything he sponsors.

I don't agree with him on the Dubai Port Deal.
I don't agree with him on open borders.
I don't agree with him on government spending.

So why do I have to agree with him on this?


we're talking about "interrogation techniques."

tell me: do you support the use of waterboarding?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:28 PM   #71
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
My point is obvious.

Lauer would contribute more to society if he worked for TRL.

He's a biased journalist who saw an opportunity to attack conservative views and he took it.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:31 PM   #72
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




firstly, Brock is gay, so i hope "waste of sperm" wasn't a slur.
By no means, and I think you missed the point.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
but, anyway, Brock himself characterizes the kind of journalism he was hired to do -- such as writing The Real Anita Hill -- was rightfully called a piece of right wing hatchet work. and there are left wing equivalents. does Lauer need to qualify this? why should he? he's talking about Brock, not talking about all kinds of hack partisan journalism.

and you'll notice the important words: "he says."

i do recommend you check out Brock's new website. it does a very good job documenting right wing bias in the mainstream media.
I'm going to take a look at his site right now.

But so what if he said "he says."

What would be wrong with an introduction like this:

"He made a living as a conservative political activist. But after years of self-examination, he looks back on his career with a newfound worldview. In his new book, the best-selling author makes his case on what he now believes to be smear campaigns plotted to destroy the Clinton presidency."
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:32 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 04:01 PM
Seems to me Matt Lauer must be one of the least biased journalists in the US. How was he biased in that interview with Bush? What are the other examples of his attacks on conservative views?
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:32 PM   #74
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




we're talking about "interrogation techniques."

tell me: do you support the use of waterboarding?
After reading what it involved, no I do not.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 01:34 PM   #75
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe


What would be wrong with an introduction like this:

"He made a living as a conservative political activist. But after years of self-examination, he looks back on his career with a newfound worldview. In his new book, the best-selling author makes his case on what he now believes to be smear campaigns plotted to destroy the Clinton presidency."
Because those weren't Brock's words to begin with...
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com