Obama to Apologize for the Osama bin Laden Hit

[Bill Thompson]

The location of Osama bin Laden was determined by following a specific message courier. The name of that specific courier was obtained by the means of torture. A central talking point of Liberals and the Democratic party is that torture does not work and is incontrovertibly immoral. Do the ends justify the means? Just as, in an American court of law, evidence and results obtained by illegal means are thrown out, shouldn't Obama have decided not to kill Osama bin Laden? Doesn't Al Qaeda deserve an apology? Obama is quick to apologize, whither it is justified and warranted or not, so shouldn't we all expect him to apologize for this?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Your thread title is misleading.

 

[Biscuit]

evidence for any of your claims?

 

[varwoche]

Your premise is bogus.

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed did not give up the courier when waterboarded. He spilled what few beans he spilled several years later, during "normal" interrogation.

 

[ravdin]

No.

 

[Tricky]

Source?

 

[Biscuit]

I like these little forays into the right wing world where logic, fact, and reason is twisted to try and justify torture.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I like these little forays into the right wing world where logic, fact, and reason is twisted to try and justify torture.

I like how the right-wingers are oblivious to the irony of using torture to kill a terrorist.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

I like how the right-wingers are oblivious to the irony of using torture to kill a terrorist.

It's not ironic. We're just tryin' to put the fear of God into 'em.


o-oh....

 

[Bill Thompson]

Your thread title is misleading.

No. My thread title is designed to expose the illiterate and lazy.

 

[Tricky]

No. My thread title is designed to expose the illiterate and lazy.

Why would you want to do that? Many might otherwise just assume you were wrong.

 

[Biscuit]

No. My thread title is designed to expose the illiterate and lazy.

How?

Are we going to see some sources for your assertions in your next post?

 

[A Laughing Baby]

To Obama: Apologize for the Bin Laden Hit

There, I fixed it to more accurately reflect your intent!

 

[gnome]

Bill Thompson to apologize for repeated assaults on straw opponents.

 

[Bill Thompson]

evidence for any of your claims?

Osama bin Laden death 'justifies' torture of suspects, former Bush aides claim
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-death-us-bush-torture-debate

Oh, please, tell me you did not know that the name of the courier that lead us to Osama bin Laden was obtained by water boarding. Is this what you are saying? You did not know this? How grand the success is that our media keeps these little fun facts from the public.

Yes, the name of the courier that lead us to Osama bin Laden was obtained by water boarding. And it was the methods of fighting the War on Terrorism set up by the Republicans that lead to the discovery of bin Laden's location.

It should be common knowledge that the courier's name was discovered by toture. And yet you are telling me it is not. Are you telling me that the burden of proof is on me and not you? To me, it is you who are stating the absurd and you should have the burden of proof. You are saying that it should be my task to account for your laziness.

Sigh. Here is google
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sa=X&....,cf.osb&fp=84fc3fb1fec5f40d&biw=1600&bih=796

Now, for the part of my OP that is supposition: It is not out of character or irrational to assume that Obama would do it. That is the point of the OP. Obama did not waste time after taking command of the Oval Office to jet off to Cairo and proclaim and support the myths of the Golden Age of Islam. He does not hesitate to apologize for the accidental burning of the Quran (apology is admission of fault -- but no one is at fault in an accident). My point in this thread is that it would not be out of character for Obama would do something as goofy as apolgize for the killing of bin Laden because Obama is so anti-toruture (he promised to close Gitmo), but of course, he would not do that because it is an election year and he wants to take sole credit for killing bin Laden.

 

[Cleon]

Osama bin Laden death 'justifies' torture of suspects, former Bush aides claim
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-death-us-bush-torture-debate

Oh, please, tell me you did not know that the name of the courier that lead us to Osama bin Laden was obtained by water boarding. Is this what you are saying? You did not know this? How grand the success is that our media keeps these little fun facts from the public.

Yes, the name of the courier that lead us to Osama bin Laden was obtained by water boarding. And it was the methods of fighting the War on Terrorism set up by the Republicans that lead to the discovery of bin Laden's location.

It should be common knowledge that the courier's name was discovered by toture. And yet you are telling me it is not. Are you telling me that the burden of proof is on me and not you? To me, it is you who are stating the absurd and you should have the burden of proof. You are saying that it should be my task to account for your laziness.

Sigh. Here is google
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sa=X&....,cf.osb&fp=84fc3fb1fec5f40d&biw=1600&bih=796

Second link down quotes a lying lefty-lib named Donald Rumsfeld, who says:

It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.

 

[Bill Thompson]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

The fact that there is a debate in the mainstream news should be telling enough. If it was a slam-dunk that the information was not obtained by torture, there would be no debate.

I think it is a truth no one wants to believe.

Liberalism is just like a religion. We have strong faith that it was not obtained by torture.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

Here's some evidence for my claim!

*puts headline of article with word "claim" in it in big font*

 

[gnome]

Someone here once tried to argue that Rumsfeld deliberately lied about the severity of detainee treatment... to make them sound worse than they were... to appease politically correct opponents who needed to attack the administration... something like that. And thus his statements should not be trusted... or something like that.

 

[gnome]

My sources say that the information was obtained by torture. But my sources cannot go public.

If they cannot go on record, it is of no value to your argument to bring them up in the first place. Argument from unverifiable authority?

Is Rumsfeld a member of this "liberal" religion? What explains his unequivocal statements on this point?