Patience bucko. Defense forthcoming.

However, this one is yours and I didn't catch any defense of your putting that forward as FACT:

Those who fail to see the necessity of deposing the Iraqi regime are either Islamist sympathizers or cowards. - Botnst

Might this be something that you assume which is "unproven and untestable?" (again, your words earlier)

Without the context, it loses meaning. Go back and read the assertion Germanstar made in characterizing me and not that I responded in-kind, not in belief. Maybe too subtle for you?

Bot

By the way, le garrote is a weapon for killing.

Sounds like a correct ruling to me. What does that case have to with the issue that you earlier claimed was a "toughy"?Yours is an unwise and immoral position, IMHO. What do we gain by lowering ourselves to the level of the terrorists? I don't see how our safety is improved and we lose the moral authority to insist on proper treatment of our own soldiers when they are captured overseas. Are you aware of any knowledgable authorities who agree with your position and who not members or contributors to the PNAC?

The Great Satanic Mouthpiece, PNAC whispers instructions to my ears in the dead of night.

Bot

I'll take that as a no, you don't know of any non-PNAC experts who agree with your position.

BTW, my guess is that the PNAC's time has past, at least I hope so. I just use them in this case because of their willingness to say anything to support their position, without regard to the facts.

In all honesty, I don't give a damn who is PNAC and who isn't. I remember when the Peroxide formerly known as Z got all excited about discovering their website where they had actually published their ideas and that many of the members wer in the administration. I read several position papers of PNAC and didn't find them especially disturbing (at worst). Much of what they said I agree with. So what? I ain't a member of that org and I haven't been to their website since Z's ref. For all I know (or care) everybody in gov is PNAC clones. So ****** what?

When folks set-about to target civilians for murder on a massive scale, they forfeit some of the Geneva Convention's protections. They want to kill babies? I say F-k'em up bad anyway you can. Killing them is the best. When we've got them in a cage I don't think we need to make sure they can keep a clasp knife and communicate with their families--two rights that POW's have. For example.

Bot

Not if it's handled by someone who knows what they're doing.

Like a knife.

In the hands of an expert a moderate pressure will cause loss of cosciousness,but not death,this method was favored by inquisitors of the Holy Office.

There are many kinds of garrotes,from thin,tough piano wire to the thicker"sicilian style" and the long scarves used by the Thuggees with weighted ends which were expertly thrown around the neck of the unwary with fatal results.

Whoa. I guess all my garroting knowledge came from of French resistence war hero movies, though I thought that attempted garroting in Godfather // looked like it was by a newbie. In Godfather it was better.

Personally I would torture terrorists for everything they are worth....then kill them...creamate them and dump the ashes in a fast moving river so no proof is ever found......Yeah..you can call me politically incorrect. It also serves to keep them from the bleeding heart types...

That's great rhetoric except that the "invasion" that they took offense to occurred during the Gulf War in Saudi Arabia to which we were invited by the same Saudi Arabians for the purpose of protecting them against Saddam Houssein. This was further aggrevated by our "women" not behaving as a woman should; i.e. working and being an equal member of society.

It's good to know that you'll defend me though when I invite someone to my house to help with a problem neighbor and then my son blows up your garage because you came over and helped.

I'd be willing to bet you some money that the "techniques" of which you speak would be objected to by the ACLU and the UN as well and would no doubt be classed as "cruel and unusual".

Bonus question:
What two countries kicked Bin Ladin's sorry butt out???

Ans: America/UK.

Reply: Uhh, no
I don't believe Bi Ladin has ever been in the U.S.
Sudan kicked his a$$ out.
Saudi Arabia would not let him in, thus effectively kicking his a$$ out.
Sorry if that doesn't fit with your agenda.


Question: Who supplied Bin Laden Stinger missiles to bring down Russian attack helicopters ?

Ans: U.S. of A, supplied arms to the Afghan Mujahadein during the cold war against the Ruskies.

Question: Who's administration was that ?

Ans: Ronnie Ray-Gun

Question: What nationality is Bin Laden ?

Ans: Born in Saudi Arabia (or was it Yemen, I don't remember). As pointed out earlier, Saudi Arabia disowned him. I have no idea if they actually cancelled his citizenship or not.

Question : Who supplies most oil to US ?

Ans: Canada
Don't believe it? Look it up.
Are there Canadian terrorists at Gitmo?

Question : Where does pipe line from oil rich sites in the Middle East need to run through ?

Ans: There are several pipelines in the works in the Middle East. As I am not a mindreader, you will need to be more specific.

Question: Who has been supplying funds to Bin Laden.

Ans: Well, the tire store in Arlington is closed down and ol' Wadi is in prison for life, so I guess we can say that source is cut off. Most of his funds are reported to be from his personal fortune. Other funding sources include fake charities, drug smuggling, gem trade, spice trade, shipping, wealthy donors, and of course, old fashioned theft and piracy.

Not a nice fellow. Needs killing. Same with Al Zawahiri and Mofo Omar and the rest of their cohorts. Off with their heads and bury them with pigs.