NYU grads are reputed to be a good catch as a husband, but don't let your hopes run away with you. Somehow I don't see polygamy in your future. Maybe not even monogamy.

"I wouldn't know about what Obama has or will be threatened with, but the founders were point blank told they would be hanged if they persisted. Nonetheless -- they persisted."

-- Kitt

Indeed, and hooray for them! And yet, many of our founding fathers owned slaves! Go figure.

When I asked folks on this site to pledge with me to throw their shoes at politicians like Bush and Cheney (war criminals responsible for the mass murder of many thousands of innocents), a non-lethal but very powerful act of disdain and symbol of defiance, folks here on Salon advocated against it.

Just sayin'.

How I was wishing one of the reporters - or anyone else in the room - at Bush's last press conference yesterday would throw a shoe at him. But they didn't even call him on his lies.

Both my cats have theme songs - Lily, the Siamese's, is PoodieDo, sung to the tune of Mission Impossible and Seth's (a variation of the Superman theme song) is Sethmo the Sethinator. My husband thought I was nuts when I first started singing them, but he's come around and now even family members sing the songs.

It never occurred to me to have one for myself. Hmmmmmm...it will have to be something the voles can dance to.

"The recent disclosure of the fact that the CIA briefed a bi-partisan group of Senators and Representatives on the Congressional Intelligence Committees about methods of torture used by the CIA, including "water boarding", is evidence that there is complicity in these crimes by members of Congress.

…Importantly, Article One of the Convention's definition of torture includes not only acts committed by Public Officials but also the acts to which they acquiesced.

"…prior to the activity constituting torture, have awareness of such activity and thereafter breach his or her legal responsibility to intervene to prevent such activity..."

…The members of Congress who were advised by the CIA that torturing prisoners, including water boarding, was being used included Rockefeller, from the family that is reaping an added fortune in billions of dollars from their oil, gas, and finance international conglomerates during the invasion and occupation of Iraq; Pelosi that voted for and continues to vote to fund the invasion and occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Palestine beyond the internationally recognized 1948 and 1967 border between Palestine and Israel.

…The Senators who were advised of the CIA's use of torture became complicit in the act of torture upon their failure to intervene in the continuing practice and, even worse, in their encouragement of the CIA’s use of torture.

…Suddenly we find out now that the CIA has destroyed the tapes of its torture sessions --- the torture methods that the Senators were briefed about and where they failed to intervene ---the visual and sound version recordings of torture, possibly including water boarding, that would make Mukasey’s inability to classify water boarding as illegal, criminal torture the mockery that it really is.

In short, the CIA destroyed the tapes---the best evidence of the illegal use of torture--- in defiance of an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in October of 2003 and May of 2004 requiring the CIA to preserve "all records pertaining to the treatment of detainees in its custody." http://www.aclu.org

Obviously, the secret affairs of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s illegal, criminal acquiescence to and failure to intervene in the use of torture was about to see the light of day so the CIA destroyed the best evidence of the Senators’ and the Representatives’ complicity."

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blo..._use_of_torture

Have a Nice Day, Barry

folks here on Salon advocated against it.

Who?

Bebop-o and Good Celery are one and the same person. I know this for a fact.

I don't pretend to understand everything that happened here, and Glenn must do what he has to to keep the comment section viable, but one thing I do know for sure is that the two entities you mentioned are one and the same poster.

another 25% concern gay rights,

Is he fer 'em, or agin' em?

Maybe the Israel is just like America Es macht mir nit oys,

Es iz nit dayn gesheft

Which is Yiddish for "Don't ask, don't tell"

Are you talking about the fMRI thing from Professor Gallant, or the helmet from Emotiv, or MALINTENT, or? They really shouldn't push these as mindreading. But it makes good stories. The first one uses blood flow in the brain, although there's a guy in the U.S. that believes that magnetic fields can control the thalamus. The second is a gaming device. The third looks like a high tech lie-detector for airports.

I'm all in favor of protecting the right to think in peace, in fact the torture treaty bans "severe disruption of the psyche". I would be in favor of privacy for thought, too. These devices are not really mind-reading though. Some case could be made for not allowing the MALINTENT scans anywhere where you don't have the right to screen people. BTW, Sony holds a patent on using a helmet to control magnetic fields to influence the thalamus to make people see virtual worlds.

I think I'm also worried, perhaps more, at the research to delete memories. Although I know it's being done with the best of intentions (to alleviate PTSD), you can see why it might best be regulated. Given what Lt.Col. Vandeveld says about BSCT psychologists and their ethics, and all.

Indefinite detention of terrorists and their supporters was and remains a most appropriate response to the killing of thousands of Americans.

1. Prove everyone being detained is a "terrorist or supporter" without doing it in secret, without torturing them, and after establishing it beyond a reasonable doubt, and you and I might have a point of agreement. Absent that I'd say put down the Jack Daniels hillbilly and step outta the 4x4 with the Yosemite Sam mudflaps and naked lady trailer hitch cover.

2. Torture is never defensible.

3. What exactly is the moral/justifiable ratio of "revenge killings" that would suffice to satiate your bloodlust?

4. Do you think it's "justice" to invade countries, necessarily causing the deaths of 10-100,000 of "known innocents".