Well Condoleeza, what will you do now?

[Knight Theamion]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4641810.stm


So, they are detaining various victims, basically kidnapping them without any form of trial, outsourcing their torture, violating basically every human right there is and then they still say they are there for the fight of freedom.


This hypocrisy is taking on insane forms. However, as pragmatic as I am, I doubt that the US of A will ever have to stand trial for their actions.

[MrL_JaKiri]

That's been effectively known for quite some time now.

[Knight Theamion]

Yes, however, the possible deniability has now been gone.

[KoeN]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

Yes, however, the possible deniability has now been gone.

you should visit that Iranian conference about the holocaust.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Middling stages where everybody knows it and nobody can prove it are useful for governments, because people become blasé about the scandals before anything can actually be done.

[acropolis]

first ignore the accusations. maybe they go away. either way, they won't get any play on the half of the media that is presently fellating you.

second, you deny them. your supporters will believe whatever you pull out of your ass, your half of the media will claim that the fact that you denied the accusations proves they were untrue. the other half of the media will report 'both sides' without any critical comment.

third, while continuing to deny them, claim there was a legal basis for whatever crime you committed anyway. you should have a report back from the justice department commenting on the legality of your action by now, sure, every single opinion says 'felony', but you can just have your appointee cross all those opinions out and put 'perfectly constitutional' there instead. now your opponents are fighting a confusing war on two fronts: yes, it was done; yes, it was a crime. okay, maybe it's not that confusing, but everyone in your media will declare it is, and the rest of the media will report that it's being reported as being confusing. see how confusing confusion can be?

fourth, at some arbitrary point declare that the whole thing is 'old news', why do they keep bringing this stuff up? BECAUSE CLEARLY THEY DON'T HAVE ANY REAL ISSUES TO STAND ON. so all they can do is throw mud. but what do you expect from the liberal media?

torture is moving into phase 4, domestic spying moving into phase 3. obviously bush has an apporval rating of 36 right now, so it's not a perfect system, but it is pretty effective. you take an issue that should drop nearly 100% of support, and only lose maybe 2 points each cycle. pretty solid 'damage control'.

[QazokRouge5]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4641810.stm


So, they are detaining various victims, basically kidnapping them without any form of trial, outsourcing their torture, violating basically every human right there is and then they still say they are there for the fight of freedom.


This hypocrisy is taking on insane forms. However, as pragmatic as I am, I doubt that the US of A will ever have to stand trial for their actions.

Basic human rights?

They're terrorists. As far as I'm concerned they have no human rights because they are scum, less than humans.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by QazokRouge5

Basic human rights?

They're terrorists. As far as I'm concerned they have no human rights because they are scum, less than humans.

Surprisingly enough in the western justice system this daft idea of "innocent until proven guilty" sort of prevails a bit. I do agree with you though, just having to accuse someone of terrorism should be sufficient proof that they're a terrorist and don't deserve any human rights. I accused George Bush of terrorism last week and when I went to interrogate him with a screwdriver and a blowtorch the secret service were all like "no, what the **** dude?" and I was like "he's a terrorist" and they were all like "quick, to the foreign jails" and I was all like "will there be cake?" and they were like "why would there be cake?" and I was all like "no reason "

[QazokRouge5]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Surprisingly enough in the western justice system this daft idea of "innocent until proven guilty" sort of prevails a bit. I do agree with you though, just having to accuse someone of terrorism should be sufficient proof that they're a terrorist and don't deserve any human rights. I accused George Bush of terrorism last week and when I went to interrogate him with a screwdriver and a blowtorch the secret service were all like "no, what the **** dude?" and I was like "he's a terrorist" and they were all like "quick, to the foreign jails" and I was all like "will there be cake?" and they were like "why would there be cake?" and I was all like "no reason "

I'm glad you're finally seeing the light.

[JonnyBGood]

The light reflects off the icing on the cake :)))