GITMO Closing?

[Leo Lakio]

Re: GITMO Closing?

John McCain says waterboarding is torture.

I don't know about anyone else, but AFAIAC, John McCain's POW background makes his view of the matter worth a million times more than the opinion of some loser contestant on Survivor.

Yet, in early 2008 when the Intelligence Authorization Bill was being voted on in the Senate, it included a provision establishing one interrogation standard across the government - requiring the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and banning waterboarding. Sen. McCain voted against the measure. His principles caved in to his party's wishes yet again - the very reason I lost respect for him during the presidential campaign.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: GITMO Closing?

Yet, in early 2008 when the Intelligence Authorization Bill was being voted on in the Senate, it included a provision establishing one interrogation standard across the government - requiring the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and banning waterboarding. Sen. McCain voted against the measure.

That particular measure that McCain voted against was not solely about waterboarding, Leo. His aide explained the vote by saying that there are noncoercive interrogation techniques not used by the Army that could be useful to the CIA. IOW, McCain didn't want to restrict the CIA to only the methods found in the Army field manual. It was one of those bills that was "loaded" with something that McCain found questionable, and so he voted against. Of course, during the heat of the 2008 Presidential campaign, all of the Democratic candidates jumped on that one vote against him to make the simplistic claim, "McCain voted against banning waterboarding." It was their way of scoring political points with the independent and moderate voters. Such are the tactics that's part and parcel during the election season. But now that the campaign's over, it's time to strip off the political rhetoric when it comes to analyzing congressional votes.

I mean, are you also going to use last week's Senate vote to "prove" that Dan Inouye is in favor of keeping Gitmo open indefinitely, instead of accepting Inouye's explanation that he and the Senate Democrats do not want to proceed with the closing of Gitmo until the Obama administration comes forward with a coherent plan on what will happen to the detainees first?

We don't live in a black-and-white world. When it comes to considering legislation, there can be several reasons why lawmakers vote against a particular bill. One can very well be generally in favor of a bill in principle. But if it contains a technical flaw or if it puts the cart before the horse, that alone would prompt astute lawmakers from voting for such a bill. Misconstruing a lawmaker's voting record is something best left to the political strategists and radio talk show firebrands who are preaching to their choir.

[TuNnL]

Re: GITMO Closing?

John McCain says waterboarding is torture.

I don't know about anyone else, but AFAIAC, John McCain's POW background makes his view of the matter worth a million times more than the opinion of some loser contestant on Survivor.

I don’t know why you’re comparing McCain to Hasselbeck since he has far more in common with Ventura, being former military-turned-politician who personally experienced techniques such as waterboarding, and concluded that it was torture. The point of my link, is that it was an opportunity to see to two diametrically opposed viewpoints clash on GitMo and waterboarding.

Perhaps Dick Cheney would be a more appropriate foe? Here’s a recent sampling of Ventura’s media campaign.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: GITMO Closing?

IOW, McCain didn't want to restrict the CIA to only the methods found in the Army field manual.

Exactly - and that's a key part of the issue with his vote; he was willing to leave the door open to other interrogation techniques, including torture.

John McCain's POW background makes his view of the matter worth a million times more than the opinion of some loser contestant on Survivor.

What I'm really saying, FM, is that Sen. McCain's longer background as a "maneuvering with whatever tack will gain him votes politician" negates his opinion on the matter, in my eyes.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: GITMO Closing?

I don’t know why you’re comparing McCain to Hasselbeck since he has far more in common with Ventura, being former military-turned-politician who personally experienced techniques such as waterboarding, and concluded that it was torture.

Comparing? I thought I made it clear that there is no comparison. Uhhh, what part of my statement that McCain's opinion is worth a million times more than Hasselbeck's did you not catch?

McCain calls waterboarding torture, that's good enough for me. The man is a Hanoi Hilton survivor. A real survivor, not some reality show version.

Do you now understand the gist of my initial post? Now Tunnl, I can't make it any clearer than that.

As far as Ventura's opinion goes, his opinion likewise carries much more weight than does Hasselbeck's.

Exactly - and that's a key part of the issue with his vote; he was willing to leave the door open to other interrogation techniques, including torture.

All right. I tried to offer an explanation for McCain's vote on the matter. If you insist on carrying on like Keith Olbermann or James Carville in full campaign mode, that's your prerogative..

My point remains: John McCain has called waterboarding "torture." He's wasn't part of the Bush/Cheney chorus that euphemistically classified waterboarding as an "enhanced interrogation technique."

This, coming from someone who did not vote for McCain last November. I may not have supported the man for President, but I haven't let that decision turn me into a partisan fanatic.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: GITMO Closing?

I may not have supported the man for President, but I haven't let that decision turn me into a partisan fanatic.

No - but you certainly have no hesitation in flinging labels upon many of the posters here whose p.o.v. isn't an exact match of yours.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: GITMO Closing?

No - but you certainly have no hesitation in flinging labels upon many of the posters here whose p.o.v. isn't an exact match of yours.

*sigh!* How to respond to the "aggrieved victim" card?

Keeping in mind what was said in the "nice people" thread, let's just agree to disagree.

Dealing properly with Gitmo should be a priority for this admin, one of many. That they havn't shut the embarrassment down and dealt with it already is not acceptable. And of course you have the typical baloney republican blab ala Thune spouting 'what Americans want'. He, like so many before him, speaks for one American, himself, at best.

I'm not so sure about that, Ron. Here are the results of a Rasmussen poll released today.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...mo_prison_camp

Forty-nine percent (49&#37 of voters nationwide now disagree with President Barack Obama’s decision to close the prison camp for suspected terrorists at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted after the President’s speech on Guantanamo last week, shows that 38% agree with his decision.

**************

And, by a 57% to 28% margin, voters oppose moving any of the suspected terrorists to prisons in the United States. Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party strongly oppose transfers to U.S. prisons. Democrats are evenly divided.

It seems that those who are calling for Gitmo to be shut down and to bring the suspected terrorists into the US can't say that they are speaking for the majority of Americans at this point in time.

[Ron Whitfield]

Unreasonable fear or not...

...it's still the right thing to do. What legitimate reason/s is there for the US to hold any prisoner/s of a war we started abroad, and certainly not to allow them basic rights. We should be much better than the examples BushCo made us out to be these last years.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: GITMO Closing?

*sigh!* How to respond to the "aggrieved victim" card? Keeping in mind what was said in the "nice people" thread, let's just agree to disagree.

Ah, once again, you play the bait-and-piss game for a while, then pretend you are the first to take the high road (after throwing in another dig, naturally).

But so many others have called you on this (and been banned briefly for it), and no one wants to see us do that again so, yes - we can live in the "agree to disagree" camp. (Which is probably not an accurate representation of you and I; I have a feeling we'd be in a lot more agreement about things irl - but we just keep bumping each other's buttons here.)

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Unreasonable fear or not...

...it's still the right thing to do. What legitimate reason/s is there for the US to hold any prisoner/s of a war we started abroad, and certainly not to allow them basic rights. We should be much better than the examples BushCo made us out to be these last years.

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I just pointed out the fact that the "close Gitmo now" crowd can't use the argument that they have the mandate of the American people.

Despite this poll's results, the President himself still maintains a healthy approval rating. I think that if the administration comes up with a plan for the prisoners that both houses of Congress can get behind on, then the general public will quickly flock back to his side on this issue. But it may take some time.

[TuNnL]

Re: GITMO Closing?

I don’t know why you’re comparing McCain to Hasselbeck since he has far more in common with Ventura, being former military-turned-politician who personally experienced techniques such as waterboarding, and concluded that it was torture.

Comparing? I thought I made it clear that there is no comparison.

Uhhh, no, you didn’t. This is what you wrote:

John McCain's POW background makes his view of the matter worth a million times more than the opinion of some loser contestant on Survivor.

That, my friend, is what I call a comparison. You are comparing McCain to Hasselbeck in this sentence. In your comparison, you contrast McCain’s POW background with Hasselbeck’s reality-television experience. How you quantify the value of McCain’s opinion is irrelevant. But if you disagree, I don’t think it’s worth arguing about. It’s simple semantics. So agree to disagree. To repeat, the point of my post was to showcase two diametrically opposed viewpoints on GitMo and waterboarding in response to Pua‘i Mana‘o’s post.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: GITMO Closing?

Uhhh, no, you didn’t. This is what you wrote:

That, my friend, is what I call a comparison. You are comparing McCain to Hasselbeck in this sentence. In your comparison, you contrast McCain’s POW background with Hasselbeck’s reality-television experience. How you quantify the value of McCain’s opinion is irrelevant. But if you disagree, I don’t think it’s worth arguing about. It’s simple semantics. So agree to disagree. To repeat, the point of my post was to showcase two diametrically opposed viewpoints on GitMo and waterboarding in response to Pua‘i Mana‘o’s post.

Uhhhhh, ok. Whatever it is you're trying to argue, have at it. But truthfully, I can't honestly "agree to disagree" on what you're saying here, since I've tried to make it clear to you for a couple of times now that McCain's opinion on waterboarding is worth many times over than that of Hasselbeck's. Simple. Nothing more. If that message is somehow not getting through to you,..... well, I tried.

Have a nice day.