Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers, or LARK Program

Not now. The reason we need competent people who don't get us into these messes, is that it's easier to get in than to get out. We created an unbelievable horror in Iraq. But now, if we just leave, it gets worse.

That will be Bush's enduring legacy.

 

Either I got it right or I misunderstood. I have asked you throughout this thread to clear up what you consider mischaracterised and to state your position re torture. Why do you refuse?

I want to characterize it accurately, but I need your cooperation to do so.

Are you in favor of torture as a useful tool in certain circumstances or against it as a crime against humanity or some undefined middle ground?

We both agree that underwear on the head is not torture. Do you think it is an effective interrogation technique or pointless humiliation of a powerless person?

If you don't like my questions, please state your position in your own terms.

My story? I'm trying to understand your story.

 

Terry,

Then you have not followed the conversation - that is ignorance. Using your ignorance in the manner that you are using it is: ______, what would you put in the blank?

I have been asking for at least a month . . . During this time, my motive has been attacked. My integrity has been attacked.

Now you attack my knowledge . . . OK, if you know why, then tell me why someone is defending islam and blaming Christians.

But, I still do not have an answer as to why such untruths were used. At least a couple were used to defend islam and blame Christianity.

So I ask . . . why would someone on a Christian board say such things? What is the motive? Can some one be that ignorant? Or, were these statements accidental? There were several. Or, is someone actually believing these untruths?

The couple of times on this board that I have made statements that ended up as exaggeration, I apologized. The couple of times that I got angry enough to sin against a 'brother', I apologized.

I am not faulting someone for making a casual mistake . . . there have been several statements. I have questioned what is going several times.

I still think that there must be a simple excuse for why a person in the Christian debate forums would defend islam to the point of slandering our Christ and the people of His Christianity . . .

 

Galatian

And evil horror resulted in Iraq. Had we created the horror, the roadside bombs would be set out by the Americans . . . a subtle difference.

Yes it is much more difficult to extricate ourselves out of this one now. And if we leave it would get much worse before it gets better, because the terrorists (with a very large iraqi mafia) only want violence. Right now, they can blame Americans being there for their evil, when Americans leave they will come up with a new reason.

Yes, I do believe that Bush will be remembered for doing this . . .

So, we agree alot and disagree some on our definitions of what is (will) happen.

 

So, what is your story? Why have you written the things that you have written?

Callousness of heart? Pure ignorance? Do you believe the muslim propoganda?

Why do you refuse?

I can agree with this: "I want to characterize [your position] . . . accurately, but I need your cooperation to do so."

 

I find your "misunderstandings" excessive in numbers. I lack the energy to repeat myself or "clear up" my position as often as it appears to be necessary with the same few people.

If you cannot repeat exactly what I say and still make your comment work then maybe you are headed down the wrong road. Paraphrasing is inappropriate.

I struggle to find any integrity in that statement when you "paraphrase" my comments quite regularly and in doing so most often get them wrong. And it "appears" that the paraphrasing is a set up to insinuate, accuse falsely, and malign my position.

 

You claim I misrepresent your position, yet when I ask you simple questions to clear up the misunderstandings, you refuse.

Paraphrasing is entirely appropriate - it is commonly used to test understanding. Since I give you the opportunity to correct any misunderstanding, you really have nothing to complain about.

You are wrong - I do try to understand your position. I ask you a lot of questions to clarify, but you generally ignore them. If you refuse to answer my questions, what can I do but guess at the answers given your past statements?

So, do you consider waterboarding to be torture or not?

 

Let's see,

We are afraid of finding out what they really know . . . because we want to think that they are innocent . . . but, when given a chance to get to know them better, they start to what . . . stink? become guilty? become an inconvenience?

Certainly has an odd ring to it. Are ya' worried thy might crash land a plane into your house if they had the address? Don't they befriend those that befriend them? Don't they protect those that agree with them?

If they don't then what other option(s) do we have?

 

Daisy

Does your silence mean that I have gotten too close to discovering your position?

Liberal? No, I think you have crossed over to defending fundamental islam. To me that is not liberal.

If I have misunderstood your position, clear it up.

These are simple questions: Why have YOU misrepresented Christians as the anti-christ? Why have YOU misrepresented anti-christs as good Christians and as good people?

Wayne

 

If we're not doing anything wrong then what's the problem with abiding with the Geneva Convention?

 

SAN

The Geneva Convention is an agreement between countries.

The mafia doesn't get protections under the Geneva Convention.

Ford doesn't get protections under the Geneva Convention.

. . . so why do we bring to the table protections that are designed to protect the soldiers? Will the terrorists quit torturing? Will the terrorists quit beheading their victims?

Besides the inequity in the treatment of our people, the greatest impact would be upon our intelligence dissemination. We could not photo the enemy and disseminate their photos . . . they would be 'prisoners of war' and not terrorists and terrorist sympathizers . . .