"Aiding and abetting the enemy" it used to be called

[JTHunter]

Not just her.

Feinstein and CIA Interrogations: Is the Senator a Traitor?

In the wake of the misguided release of her committee’s one-sided, politically motivated report on the CIA’s interrogation techniques, Senator Dianne Feinstein is being forced to defend her actions; as well she should. If Feinstein’s self-righteous posturing and obvious rationalizing appear strained, it is probably because there is no defense for what she did. In fact, it is entirely appropriate to ask if releasing her report makes Feinstein a traitor. People who knowingly and willingly act in ways that benefit America’s enemies are labeled traitors. It is no stretch to suggest that releasing a highly sensitive report that could and should have been handled confidentially will benefit the terrorist organizations that seek to destroy America.

http://patriotupdate.com/articles/fe...nator-traitor/

[raxar]

How can an enemy of the republic be a traitor?

[imanaknut]

My feelings as soon as I heard that America hater was in charge of the release.

[alismith]

She did this to direct peoples' attention away from the Gruber hearing (held on the same day) in an effort to minimize anything that Gruber might have said about the administration and the ACA cover-up.

I hope this backfires on her and everyone else involved.

She should be, publicly, hung from a gallows on the Capitol's steps so America can see what happens to traitors. (Pipe dream, I know...)

[Schuetzenman]

Anyone connected with that report should be tried for treason and summarily executed.

[5.56NATO]

Not just her.

Well, America shouldn't be in the business of torture. A person will say anything you want at a certain point so what validity does information obtained in this manner have?

Where the treason lies is in the cia running arms to their cutouts - isis, wich lead to the Benghazi murders, and the continued aid being sent via Turkey from nato to isis, isis being a creation of cia and the state department with roots going back to their agent Ussama Bin Laden and the Afghan Freedom Fighters of 1979. Not to mention the daily, hourly even, levying of war upon the United States by Resident 0bama, the scrotus, and our misrepresentatives and senatraitors.

[l921428x]

She did this to direct peoples' attention away from the Gruber hearing (held on the same day) in an effort to minimize anything that Gruber might have said about the administration and the ACA cover-up.

I hope this backfires on her and everyone else involved.

She should be, publicly, hung from a gallows on the Capitol's steps so America can see what happens to traitors. (Pipe dream, I know...)

gruber's name is starting to pop up in other areas, like myra. some have him on the scene in the mid 90's.

[Kadmos]

This is far from treason. Everyone already knew we tortured people, this is just official clarification of what we did.

As far as "aid or comfort", I doubt they are comforted knowing what we have done and might do to them. Could it help recruitment as some suggest, and aid them that way?

Well, first off, why assume more people will want to cross the US knowing it might lead to torture? I wouldn't exactly call that an incentive "Oh, by the way, the American might keep you up four days straight in a stress position while force-feeding you hummus through your ass".

I'm not sure why people think the natural response to that is "Great! Where do I sign up?"

And, it's not like it's her fault we tortured people. This could have been easily avoided by simply not torturing people.

[alismith]

This is far from treason. Everyone already knew we tortured people, this is just official clarification of what we did.

As far as "aid or comfort", I doubt they are comforted knowing what we have done and might do to them. Could it help recruitment as some suggest, and aid them that way?

Well, first off, why assume more people will want to cross the US knowing it might lead to torture? I wouldn't exactly call that an incentive "Oh, by the way, the American might keep you up four days straight in a stress position while force-feeding you hummus through your ass".

I'm not sure why people think the natural response to that is "Great! Where do I sign up?"

And, it's not like it's her fault we tortured people. This could have been easily avoided by simply not torturing people.

[JTHunter]

Well, America shouldn't be in the business of torture. A person will say anything you want at a certain point so what validity does information obtained in this manner have?

Nato - to a certain extent, I agree with that statement.
However, there is also the "Do unto others" philosophy. In that respect, what we have done to them is NOTHING to what SHOULD have been done!

Ali - if Kad is so obtuse that he doesn't realize what a "recruitment tool the release of this report is, he never will.

[5.56NATO]

Here's your aiding and abetting;

I wonder how many more Muslims are now working in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security?


The Obama Regime is crawling with high- and mid-level Muslim personnel, many of them members of the designated (by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, & Bahrain) terrorist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2014/1...land-security/

[Kadmos]

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Nato - to a certain extent, I agree with that statement.
However, there is also the "Do unto others" philosophy. In that respect, what we have done to them is NOTHING to what SHOULD have been done!

It's "Do to others as you would have them do to you"

not

"Do to others as they have done onto you"

It's about treating people the way you would want to be treated.

if Kad is so obtuse that he doesn't realize what a "recruitment tool the release of this report is, he never will.

Everyone seems to assume this increases recruitment, but there is no proof of that. Seems to me just as good of a theory is a lot of people may not want to join up and potentially get tortured.

Will this report anger them, yeah I would think so. Frankly it angers me. But the problem isn't that the report came out, it's that it contains shit we shouldn't have done.

Had we not tortured people we wouldn't have this problem.

[alismith]

It's "Do to others as you would have them do to you"

not

"Do to others as they have done onto you"

It's about treating people the way you would want to be treated.

Based on that comment, then we should, publicly, behead every Islamist we capture and place it on YouTube. After all, this is the way they want to be treated....

[Kadmos]

Based on that comment, then we should, publicly, behead every Islamist we capture and place it on YouTube. After all, this is the way they want to be treated....

So then they should behead everyone they capture?

This really isn't a difficult concept, you treat people the way you would want to be treated.

How they treat people doesn't enter into it.

We signed the Geneva conventions, agreeing to how we would treat captives. We also have the 5th amendment and the 8th amendment to declare our intentions on the rights of man, which combined certainly don't allow for torture.

We are supposed to be better than this.

[alismith]

So then they should behead everyone they capture?

This really isn't a difficult concept, you treat people the way you would want to be treated.

How they treat people doesn't enter into it.

They already do that. They behead everyone they capture.

As you said, above, "you treat people the way you would want to be treated." Therefore, since they behead their captives, then they are telling us that they "would want" us to behead them, too.

Yes, your concept is very easy to see and understand.

What part of your concept is giving you trouble?

(I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.)

[Kadmos]

They already do that. They behead everyone they capture.

As you said, above, "you treat people the way you would want to be treated." Therefore, since they behead their captives, then they are telling us that they "would want" us to behead them, too.

Yes, your concept is very easy to see and understand.

What part of your concept is giving you trouble?

(I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.)

It's the part where I am supposed to throw away my morals because someone else is lacking.

I believe in treating others the way I would want them to treat me...not treating others the way they might want to treat me.

It's not about what they do, it's about what I do, about what I think my country should do.

If I wanted to be like them, then I could just join them. Or as you suggest just be the other side of the same coin.

I may not be able to force others to always act right, but I can act better than others, that's something I do control.

[alismith]

I understand what you're saying about yourself, but what the Islamists are saying, based on what you stated above, is that they WANT to be treated they way they treat their captives.

I didn't say we "should" do that, but they are telling us they WANT to be beheaded, right?

[Kadmos]

I understand what you're saying about yourself, but what the Islamists are saying, based on what you stated above, is that they WANT to be treated they way they treat their captives.

I didn't say we "should" do that, but they are telling us they WANT to be beheaded, right?

Perhaps they do. They might want to make themselves martyrs. I doubt it's what they want...I assume they want to kill us and that's pretty much it.

None of which has anything to do with how we should be treating others, which is the real issue here.

[alismith]

If they want to be martyrs, we should do our best to help they in any way we can. After all, you can't have any unhappy Islamists running around. We should make them all "happy."

[Kadmos]

If they want to be martyrs, we should do our best to help they in any way we can. After all, you can't have any unhappy Islamists running around. We should make them all "happy."

So if you look at it that way then all she did was help more people decide to become martyrs