Comments (89)

EdNSted wrote on October 30, 2007 5:18 PM:

I strongly suspect that if Susan Mukasey were waterboarded, he's have no problem labeling it as torture... and those who committed such a heinous act as terrorists.

This man is not fit for the office of Attorney General.

Mike M. wrote on October 30, 2007 5:18 PM:

I wonder if he'd say it if we jammed blindfolded him, jammed a rag into his mouth and convinced him he was drowning.

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 5:25 PM:

I still consider this progress. Alberto Gonzales called it torture yet he allowed it anyway. I guess having the job isn't that important to Mukasey.

Other than Cheney and Addington, how many people REALLY themselves believe that waterboarding isn't torture?

Gullibility wrote on October 30, 2007 5:26 PM:

Well, I think we should just trust him on this, let him study the matter, let him take time to figure out what bush wants him to conclude.

But NOT as AG!

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 5:28 PM:

10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering your nose or mouth, is torture? You guys are wussies.

jrcj wrote on October 30, 2007 5:28 PM:

if he calls it torture he'll have to investigate the prez when he takes office. if he says it's not he's either a stooge or an idiot.

So he can't be confirmed (no one can be confirmed), and Bush keeps his interim appointee, which is what he wanted all along.

I always thought the nomination would get held up over Congress's demands for documents and the WH refusal to provide them, not this, but either way, Bush gets what he wants. An end run around the Congress for his nominee of choice. He doesn't care if the doj is weakened by it, as long as his bushie is in the top spot.

ihateemo wrote on October 30, 2007 5:28 PM:

I always say: if it's not torture, let's allow local law enforcement to use the same tactics in interrogations and see how people feel then.

GySgt213 wrote on October 30, 2007 5:32 PM:

"On the other hand, if he does declare it illegal, he may be rendering a legal judgment on everyone who authorized waterboarding or used it in interrogation. "They are putting him in an almost untenable position on this," says White House spokesman Tony Fratto."

Ahh, Tony, I am neither a lawyer or great legal mind, but the attorney general can't render legal judgments. He can however, render legal opinions which would then be asserted and or challenged in a court of law. Isn't rendering legal opinions part of the job of the attorney general there Tony? or is that up to debate too.

gp20 wrote on October 30, 2007 5:33 PM:

Can someone ask them "If waterboarding isn't torture, then why don't we use it here in the US?"

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 5:36 PM:

Tony Fratto would make the Senate confirmation process out to be a Catch-22. Too bad that straw man has been knocked down. Might'a worked in 2004, but not now.

M M wrote on October 30, 2007 5:36 PM:

Cheney/Addington have been hammering the Dems into submission and it is time to hammer back. You've got an issue of moral clarity that average Americans recognize on its face. Any vote to confirm Mukasey is now a vote to condone waterboarding (among a host of Bush/Cheney/Addington over-reaches). Just say no.

And Jake D.: don't come back to this chat until after you have personally undergone waterboarding by the SERE specialists. Check out Small Wars Journal. You seem more like a keyboard warrior and wouldn't have the balls to do it yourself.

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 5:37 PM:

Welcome to the theater of the absurd. There is NO legal question here. Precedents go back hundreds of years. The US tried Japanese soldiers after WWII for waterboarding. Every international court in the world would do the same. If Mukasey can't buck the administration on something as straightforward as this, what are the chances he'll do so on anything else?

phil james wrote on October 30, 2007 5:37 PM:

What I don't understand is why he just doesn't flat out state he believes it is torture. Just say anything he thinks the Dems want to hear. He should simply pull a Roberts. He would get confirmed. Dems would then call him on it in hearings after the fact when he does nothing about it and he could say he reviewed it later and no longer thinks it is torture. No one seriously beieves ANY Bush nominee is going to hold any member of the Bush Admin accountable for torture or any other damn thing do they? And while we're all wondering if the Senate will confirm anyone as AG, the DOJ is still being run by the WH.

P J Evans wrote on October 30, 2007 5:39 PM:

If he can't tell it's torture, based on the decisions that are already on record (via treaties and WW2 war crimes trials), then he ain't fit for AG ... or any other office in the DOJ, except, *maybe*, mail room clerk.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 5:45 PM:

M M:

I fought in the Army during the Korean War -- how about you? And, if you really think I can't support waterboarding without first subjecting myself to the procedure, may I ask if you feel the same about supporting abortion on demand?

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 5:47 PM:

Mike M: He'd say "MHWMHMHGHMHMMWM!"

jrcjr wrote on October 30, 2007 5:50 PM:

Is assault still illegal? or does it now have to feel like organ failure too?

my understanding is that assaulting prisoners is still illegal, whether it's torture or not; but that torture itself rises to the level of a war crime.

how did this discussion devolve to whether or not torture was legal?

DCA wrote on October 30, 2007 5:58 PM:

If it isn't torture, then when can we expect our local law enforcement to adopt this tactic?

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 5:58 PM:

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 5:28 PM:
10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering your nose or mouth, is torture? You guys are wussies.

Jake D:
What's with you and this cellophane thing? You've been repeating the same nonsense like an epileptoid...
Actually, 10 seconds of reading of your idiotic posts are worse than waterboarding!
They are CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment!

selise wrote on October 30, 2007 6:03 PM:

"Harold Kim, a former Specter staffer who works in the White House Counsel's office, has been negotiating with Judiciary Committee Democrats, trying to find language they can live with."

i'm confused.

i thought the SJC was asking Mukasey to answer the questions about his thinking/judgement/position - and not the White House Counsel's office.

if the White House Counsel's office is telling Mukasey what to think... isn't that a problem?

M M wrote on October 30, 2007 6:04 PM:

Jake D: Thanks for your service in Korea. Were you or any of your buddies captured? Were they tortured? Were they waterboarded? Why don't you read the Small Wars Journal article written by a SERE specialist who interviewed US POWs who were waterboarded (and he had it done to himself as well)? Then decide for yourself if waterboarding (it's not 10 seconds with plastic wrap) is torture as has been prosecuted by the U.S. going back hundreds of years. Then ask yourself if you would want your Army buddies to have gone through the same thing or any current U.S. serviceman to go through it say in Iran. What's good for us is good for other countries. Then ask yourself about all the crap intel/false leads you get from waterboarding because the peson will say anything to make the torture stop which just might lead us into another quagmire and make this country even less safe the current crowd has made us today.

TheraP wrote on October 30, 2007 6:04 PM:

Is torture legal or not? We can thank John Yoo (or You, or Ewe .... whatever!) for that discussion.

Jane wrote on October 30, 2007 6:05 PM:

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Waterboarding has long been recognized as torture. So if Mukasey says so and some individuals acting for the US at the behest of this administration are shown to have waterboarded and run into legal difficulty as tortures, so be it.

Mukasey seems to be arguing I can't call it torturing because some of our people have done it and if I admit that it is torture they'l get in trouble. That's a cover-up.

Jake D: Don't be sillier than you can help. Your argument on waterboarding is logically falacious. Yes, everything is a matter of degree. An analogous argument: the fact that you can give someone a mild cut with a razor does not mean that slicing people with razors is not torture.

The whole theory behind torture is that fear and pain produce willingness to answer questions so I doubt your 10 second procedure has ever been employed. Results show that the theory is wrong -- better results can be produced by other methods.

v. popvli wrote on October 30, 2007 6:06 PM:

pain comparable to organ failure is too high a bar to define torture and we all know it. how about crushing a detainee's fingers or hands in a vice? giving people cigarette burns? holding someone's feet to fire? all of these would be legal under the "pain akin to death or organ failure" definition of torture. SICK SICK SICK

synykyl wrote on October 30, 2007 6:09 PM:

"I fought in the Army during the Korean War ..."

I don't give a damn if you fought in the freakin' Revolutionary War. Waterboarding *is* torture. Argue in support of it of you will, but cut out the bs.

ivorybill wrote on October 30, 2007 6:10 PM:

For Jake D: Waterboarding is for wussies? I read TPM frequently, comment rarely, but I still can't figure you out. I work in Iraq now, and have worked for years with torture survivors in the United States. Asphixiation is pretty clearly a torture technique. When you combine it over time with sleep deprivation, stress positions, hypothermia, and the various other abuses the US inflicts on detainees, it is clear that systemic and severe torture is now official US policy.

There are those who, through insecurity, fear, and misplaced nationalism, wish to glorify torture or minimize it, or otherwise pretend it is something it is not. That's a sad reflection on you and on the state of our country. By the way, your service in Korea (peeling potatoes?) does not by itself entitle you to the presumption that you are honorable or that your views carry any more weight than a child's. Others of us serve, in different capacities, without compromising our principles or our souls, without giving in to fear.

Praedor Atrebates wrote on October 30, 2007 6:11 PM:

It is really quite simple. If it is not torture than it is perfectly OK for other countries to use the technique against American prisoners, be they soldiers caught in battle or arrested for crime.

biggerbox wrote on October 30, 2007 6:12 PM:

Gee, if Mukasey isn't well enough informed about waterboarding to decide about it, are there OTHER commonly accepted legal norms that he doesn't know anything about?

How about shooting someone in the head? Is that illegal, or will he have to study it and get back to us?

Extortion? Legal? Would he need to review?

Dealing heroin to minors? Where does he come down on that?

Does Mukasey share any of the historically accepted definitions of criminality?

He's also been vague about Presidential power. Just where does Mukasey's confusion about cruelty vs Presidential power extend? If the President claimed the need to inject poison into babies to protect the nation, would that be OK? Or would he require some serious study before he could decide?

hollando wrote on October 30, 2007 6:16 PM:

Jake, as a putative Korean veteran, I assume then you would have welcomed the news that one of your brothers in arms had been waterboarded by the Koreans with
"Well, that's just tough, you wussy."
I'm sure.

Any member of the armed services who advocates or sanctions prisoner abuse should not only be ashamed of themselves, but should also make public statements asserting the appropriateness of any abuse of American prisoners by our opponents

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:17 PM:

M M:

You're welcome -- what we need is an OBJECTIVE standard for "torture" -- if someone wimps out after holding their breath for 10 seconds, that SUBJECTIVE standard cannot be the basis for terrorist interrogation people!!!

(Thanks for the book suggestion -- I'll put that on my Amazon Wish List : )

United, I stand alone against collectivism wrote on October 30, 2007 6:19 PM:

Jake:

I didn't serve in any conflict or armed service. I got five deferments (for legitimate reasons, I swear). So I think I have to take your word on it that water boarding isn't torture. I mean, c'mon, cellophane over the mouth for ten seconds, psssssshhh. Wussies! Might as well give em a candy bar and a kiss on the cheek when it's done. Look, even after hours and hours over years and years of 10 seconds under cellophane (and you know they time these things), with water being poured over you by an obviously very caring, and certainly compassionate and law abiding professional interrogator, what really is the essential harm here? Pruning up? I mean, these guys are pros. They know that so called "water-boarding" is really just a fancy term for a spa treatment. It's not like they're raping little boys in front of their compatriots and video-taping it or something. Oh yeah, and all those wussies can just go fuck themselves, huh Jake? I'm with you. Fuck people who care about human rights. We're warriors!

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:19 PM:

synykyl:

Someone accused me of not serving, which is why I posted that, but thank you so much for your input.

Hanging Judge wrote on October 30, 2007 6:20 PM:

I've just recently (past couple of weeks) noticed the comments of Jake D. and have to ask him "Are you on the GOP payroll?" I firmly believe everyone should have his say, and that goes especially for Jake D. But I can't imagine someone hanging around TPM just to take shots at the posts and comments. So, how about it, Jake D., are you or are you not on the GOP payroll?

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:24 PM:

No. Are you?

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 6:34 PM:

Jake the lying fraud (not to mention bigot) proves once again he is not only a total moron, but a sociopath.

David Studhalter wrote on October 30, 2007 6:35 PM:

OK, fine. If Cheney and Addington (no need to ask where Bush is in all of this) want to resist any questioning of "presidential authority" to torture, and Mukasey's willing to be their stooge, then turn him down flat. And if they send up another stooge who won't answer legitimate questions in his nomination hearings, turn him down too. These people have to be shown that the Congress has constitutional powers no matter what dangerous crackpot theories they have, and if they want to paralyze the government by refusing to participate in the constitutional process, that's their choice, but the onus is on them.

Personally, I think Congress has been extremely remiss in failing to impeach Cheney AND Bush, a long, long time ago.

David S North Hollywood CA

Mary wrote on October 30, 2007 6:36 PM:

It isn't that the Judiciary committee has put Mukasey in an untenable position; it's that anyone who engaged in torture put themselves in an untenable position and anyone who ordered torture put themselves in an untenable position and anyone in DOJ/OLC who conspired to solicit and cover up torture put themselves in untenable positions.

But it really is what jrcj said above. Bush would no doubt prefer Keisler anyway, but the "price" to Congress for getting anyone any better is, like it was for the telecoms, immunity for year after year after year of unrelenting criminal activity. For those who don't want to pay that price, Bush is happy with Keisler who is inarguably worse than Mukasey.

The difference for Mukasey for going down on torture vs. on documents, is that he will now, forever, be known primarily as the AG who was in favor of letting Presidents torture at their whim and for their personal vanity and pleasure. Whether he gets the thumb up or down, that's what he's claimed as his legacy - the waterboarding AG.

OTOH, that's the best this country can claim as its legacy now too and none of the Dems are willing to do anything about it either. If Pelosi won't stand up and say waterboarding is an impeachable offense, why should Mukasey stick his neck out further than she will?

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 6:39 PM:

Don't worry hollando, Jake is about as familiar with the USMCJ and how it forbids prisoner abuse as he is with how not to be a sociopath (i.e. not very familiar at all).

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:40 PM:

See what I'm dealing with, Hanging Judge? People like lestatdelc upset at my free speech rights -- resorting to vicious ad hominem attacks -- the calls to ban me from TPM can't be far behind. Maybe the reason you never see opposing viewpoints here is because Josh likes the echo-chamber?

global yokel wrote on October 30, 2007 6:42 PM:

In the America I thought I grew up in, it wasn't necessary to have an extended, detailed converation about horrors like waterboarding. Our reaction was visceral, and quick-- we knew in our bones that it was wrong. The fact that the conversation about this form of torture has even taken place in an important deliberative body like the US Senate is an indication of just how far we have fallen as a nation under the Bush administration.

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 6:49 PM:

LOL nice strawman Jake, when did I ever say you should be denied to make a total ass of yourself here?

Once again Jake proves he is not only a moron, but a disingenuous liar and a "wussy" for crying like a little girl that someone calls him on his BS.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:54 PM:

As I said, Hanging Judge, the calls [from others] to ban me from TPM can't be far behind.

M M wrote on October 30, 2007 6:55 PM:

Jake D: don't go. We need right wing nutjobs like you to espouse your BS freely (like Podhoretz) rather than stay quiet until you get into positions of power.

It's not the Senate's problem that Bush/Cheney/Addington told people to torture--it's an unlawful order that should not have been followed (and eventually wasn't once the CIA agents smartened up on their legal liability).

Any Senator voting for Mukasey is confirming torture as a new U.S. value.

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 6:58 PM:

I feel your pain, I can imagine the hardest part of playing a martyr and climbing up on your cross must be getting that last nail in, right Jake?

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 6:59 PM:

M M:

Wanna bet that Mukasey gets at least 64 votes?

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 7:07 PM:

I would be very surprised if Kohl and Whitehouse vote against Mukasey -- not so sure about Feinstein and Cardin -- but, Chuckie Schumer RECOMMENDED him to the President, for God's sake!!

United, I stand alone against collectivism wrote on October 30, 2007 7:08 PM:

I say let Jake stay. All sarcasm aside. We could all refrain from anger and name-calling and still be allowed a post, and get a point across. I really am with Jake, even though I was an asshole about it. Torture is torture, bro. Oh, and Jake, I would put money down that he gets the nod. I don't think the Dems have it in them quite yet. I hope I'm wrong. That's a bet I'd be willing to lose.

M M wrote on October 30, 2007 7:12 PM:

I wouldn't bet a nickel on Leahy but I'd rather go down fighting on the right side of American values.

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 7:24 PM:

"United, I stand alone against collectivism" Nobody has suggested Jake the bigoted moron be banned. The only person bringing up that fevered accusation of having his 1st amendment rights denied (never mind that said right is not applicable to posting comments on a privately owned blog) is the wingnut buffoon with persecution complexes... i.e. Jake.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 7:35 PM:

For the record, I never said the First Amendment was implicated on a private web site, but there have indeed been calls to ban me. If anyone not on the "Ignore List" for resorting to personal attacks has a question about that, please let me know.

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 7:38 PM:

This non-sense over whethere waterboarding "is or isn't torture" is pointless: Geneva prohibits abuse. It doesn't matter whether anyone does or doesn't agree with a "definition of torture" or whether they agree or disagree waterboarding is or isn't torture.

Focuse on Geneva. Think about abuse. Then ask it again: "Is waterboarding abuse?" If Senators to "think about the answer", there's a bigger problem: They have mental reservations about whether they believe Geneva is or is not something to enforce.

Stop arguing over definitions. Focus on Geneva. Waterboarding is illegal abuse. It is a war crime. The US is "at war" because Congress "approved" the AUMF. Time to conduct a war crimes trial for illegal prisoner of war abuse.

lestatdelc wrote on October 30, 2007 7:42 PM:

ROFLMAO I forgot how funny Jake the mental midget's "ignore list" from his ThinkProgess trolling days. Ranks up there with the "la la la I can't hear you" gambit.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 7:46 PM:

Anyone else?

United, I stand alone against collectivism wrote on October 30, 2007 7:54 PM:

That's quite a rep, Jake. So far off the fucking topic, sheesh. Care to comment? Why do you spend time here? What are you trying to convince us of? What are we missing?

bob wrote on October 30, 2007 8:12 PM:

I want to play the Jake D. role on some right-wing blogs. Seriously, does anyone know what the largest right-wing blog is that allows comments?

Not Little Green Footballs (I think they banned Ron Paul supporters!), not Instapundit, not Michelle Malkin...

Anonymous wrote on October 30, 2007 8:15 PM:

I'd rather die than have America torture people, so I don't see how that is the wussy position.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 8:17 PM:

What was "off topic" again? As for why I am here, I'm just retired with lots of time to wast -- I'm not trying to convince you of anything -- I'm here as the Devil's Advocate.

AC wrote on October 30, 2007 8:27 PM:

While it may seem prudent for Mukasey to hedge a bit under this kind of scrutiny (I think of all the Supreme Court nominees who haven't had to give straight answers since Bork), it does send a message to the guys "in the room" doing interrogations. This kind of grey area thinking aloud is dangerous. Without clear, not legalistic leadership from the Pres., operatives will take it as tacit permission to cross the line.

Should a US soldier or citizen be taken captive by an enemy, I'd like to hear Jake and his ilk call those who protest ill treatment of them "pussies."

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 8:30 PM:

I don't think I've ever called anyone a "pussy". Next canard?

nofltwlt wrote on October 30, 2007 8:37 PM:

The solution is simple; bring U.S. trained waterboarders into the hearing and waterboard Mukasey for a few hours every morning, afternoon and evening for the next three weeks - then ask him if waterboarding is torture.

Jake D. wrote on October 30, 2007 8:46 PM:

Who said anything about HOURS? Is 10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering your nose or mouth, torture?

Radio Head wrote on October 30, 2007 9:55 PM:

Waterboarding is torture and Mukasey knows it. Mukasey retracted his original testimony in order to go to the mattresses about something that truly isn't important. Hell, he can say anything, then do what he wants once confirmed! The game, as always, is that bullyboy Georgie needs to make people in inferior positions back down. It's what he lives for. It's pathetic, of course, as is the lack of spine of Dems who continue to enable him. Oh, and Jake pretends to be ignorant of waterboarding's effects because he thrives on getting people angry at him. He knows better than a lot of the things he says, but he enjoys that you answer him back.

phil james wrote on October 30, 2007 11:02 PM:

But you see, for the Bush administration there is a clear difference, to them, between "torture" the legal term as defined by White House counsel and torture the common term used to describe inflicting physical pain or mental anguish to coerce a subject to do something against their will. Let's call the former TLT and the latter painful coercion or PC. Now, when Bush says the Feds don't torture he means they don't employ TLT, which they don't, because TLT is whatever the WH says it is. Most rational humans understand what PC is and would agree that waterboarding is PC. But what Mukasey is stuck with is attempting to say something responsive about the one thing--torture--that is actually two things and have both the TLT crowd and the PC crowd accept his statement. All that aside, I think we outght to drop this whole discussion of torture and focus on what this board should really be about...Jake D.

synykyl wrote on October 30, 2007 11:51 PM:

"Who said anything about HOURS? Is 10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering your nose or mouth, torture?"

Yes. It's still torture, whether it's done for 10 seconds, 10 minutes, or 10 hours. Are you really that dense?

Mari wrote on October 31, 2007 3:43 AM:

A note to JakeD. Let's see. Let us meet a week from today and we will let someone water-board you like they did Senator McCain. Then you can tell us if you agree with him that water-boarding is definitely torture. Now let me see, you think McCain is telling a lie when he says without equivocation that water-boarding is gruesome torture. God's law is what you sow, you get to reap. Careful what you sow.

Jake D. wrote on October 31, 2007 11:06 AM:

Mari:

I never said McCain is a "liar" -- let me pose an analogy though -- do you support abortion? Don't worry, I won't say you have to allow an abortion to be performed on you in order to be pro-choice ; )

lestatdelc wrote on October 31, 2007 3:29 PM:

Hey Jake, is former Navy SEAL Instructor Malcolm Nance a wussy too because he states unequivocally that:

1. Waterboarding is a torture technique. Period. There is no way to gloss over it or sugarcoat it. It has no justification outside of its limited role as a training demonstrator. Our service members have to learn that the will to survive requires them accept and understand that they may be subjected to torture, but that America is better than its enemies and it is one’s duty to trust in your nation and God, endure the hardships and return home with honor.

2. Waterboarding is not a simulation. Unless you have been strapped down to the board, have endured the agonizing feeling of the water overpowering your gag reflex, and then feel your throat open and allow pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, you will not know the meaning of the word.

Waterboarding is a controlled drowning that, in the American model, occurs under the watch of a doctor, a psychologist, an interrogator and a trained strap-in/strap-out team. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning. How much the victim is to drown depends on the desired result (in the form of answers to questions shouted into the victim’s face) and the obstinacy of the subject. A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience, to horrific suffocating punishment to the final death spiral.

Waterboarding is slow motion suffocation with enough time to contemplate the inevitability of black out and expiration –usually the person goes into hysterics on the board. For the uninitiated, it is horrifying to watch and if it goes wrong, it can lead straight to terminal hypoxia. When done right it is controlled death. Its lack of physical scarring allows the victim to recover and be threaten with its use again and again.

Call it “Chinese Water Torture,” “the Barrel,” or “the Waterfall,” it is all the same. Whether the victim is allowed to comply or not is usually left up to the interrogator. Many waterboard team members, even in training, enjoy the sadistic power of making the victim suffer and often ask questions as an after thought. These people are dangerous and predictable and when left unshackled, unsupervised or undetected they bring us the murderous abuses seen at Abu Ghraieb, Baghram and Guantanamo. No doubt, to avoid human factors like fear and guilt someone has created a one-button version that probably looks like an MRI machine with high intensity waterjets.

BTYW, wussy is a slang contraction of wimp and pussy, so you were indeed calling people pussies.

Joe wrote on November 2, 2007 3:52 PM:

Why stop with the terrorists? Let's bring the CIA Sponsored Swim Lesson to a college campus near you. For use against all scum bags, foreign and domestic. Just like Mr. Taser. (satire)

http://conspiracytheorysatire.blogspot.com/2007/11/cia-sponsored-swim-lesson.html

t-bone wrote on November 2, 2007 4:57 PM:

Either Jake D. is lying about his service or he is exhibit A for the argument in favor of more funding for mental health services for the VA. No one who ever worn a uniform in service of this country and remains in possesion of all their marbles would advocate officially sanctioned torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions, understanding that those methods could and would then be used aginst their fellow soldiers and sailors.

Don't bother responding to this Jake; I don't engage with liars or the the mentally ill, and you are clearly one or the other

CPT t-bone, U.S. Army 1970-1974

MrGoodpharma wrote on November 4, 2007 10:19 PM:

All greetings! :)
I found the place, where I can buy popular medicines online.
For example, popular pill Acomplia.
This here
Buy Acomplia Rimonabant pill only $1.77 here

http://health.propeller.com/story/2007/10/29/buy-acomplia-rimonabant-online

It is one of the most popular drugstores with the good prices where I can buy.
Bye!

xztheericzx wrote on November 4, 2007 11:19 PM:

i'm eric. joining a couple boards and looking
forward to participating. hehe unless i get
too distracted!

eric

MrGoodpharma wrote on November 6, 2007 10:02 AM:

All greetings! :)
I found the place, where I can buy popular medicines online.
For example, popular pill Acomplia.
This here
Buy Acomplia Rimonabant pill only $1.77 here

http://health.propeller.com/story/2007/10/29/buy-acomplia-rimonabant-online

All for your health - the low prices.
Bye!

MrGoodpharma wrote on November 7, 2007 9:02 PM:

Good afternoon! :)
I found the place, where I can buy popular medicines online.
For example, popular pill [url=http://health.propeller.com/story/2007/10/29/buy-acomplia-rimonabant-online]Acomplia.[/url]
What is Acomplia?
Acomplia (Rimonabant) is the first in a new class of therapeutic agents.
It's help me stop smoking.
Acomplia is used in the treatment of obesity and related conditions.
All for your health - the low prices.
Bye!

xztheericzx wrote on November 10, 2007 3:50 AM:

i'm eric. joining a couple boards and looking
forward to participating. hehe unless i get
too distracted!

eric

xztheericzx wrote on November 11, 2007 8:58 AM:

i'm eric. joining a couple boards and looking
forward to participating. hehe unless i get
too distracted!

eric

Eskimosik wrote on November 16, 2007 5:55 PM:

Hello

What do you think about this? When it happens?

Eskimosik wrote on November 19, 2007 8:17 PM:

Hail

What do you think about this? When it happens?

Eskimosik wrote on November 19, 2007 9:46 PM:

Hi all!

What do you think about this? When it happens?

mishkoAndoey wrote on November 26, 2007 9:45 AM:

Hello

Pharma certificed?viagra buy
G'night

scamubsermava wrote on December 2, 2007 3:22 AM:

Interestingly enough, the majority of these same people who are confused about how to permanently lose fat, avoid any type of bodybuilding fitness or diet program like the plague.

rakesinna wrote on December 27, 2007 10:22 PM:

amoxil calv
buy adipex online

rakesinna wrote on December 28, 2007 1:03 AM:

paxil cr
order ambien

RorcoicYcig wrote on December 29, 2007 1:24 AM:

Good afternoon. I the first time at a forum. Very much at you it was
pleasant to me.

RorcoicYcig wrote on December 29, 2007 4:08 AM:

Good afternoon. I the first time at a forum. Very much at you it was
pleasant to me.

Foeneuttops wrote on January 3, 2008 9:12 PM:

advance cash loan
bad credit student loan
advance cash
debt loan
bad credit loan

Foeneuttops wrote on January 3, 2008 9:12 PM:

advance cash loan
bad credit student loan
advance cash
debt loan
bad credit loan

Chad wrote on January 8, 2008 12:57 PM:

hello

chad wrote on January 8, 2008 12:58 PM:

hello

jukrentrs wrote on January 15, 2008 4:52 AM:

Hello buddys!
how r u today
Take a look best Buy Viagra Online for cheap cash!