US' new standards

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

So UT... You support this??These are the standards you are holding me up to here? Heh.

TheMercenary - you complain when one finally posts at you as you were doing repeatedly? The big black kettle sees itself in the mirror - and complains? Suddenly you don't like when tw duplicates your own agenda?

TheMercenary. You do yourself a big favor by learning the difference between logical replies verses emotional and poltically inspired attacks. Suddenly you don't like a mirror image of yourself? I would have ignored it except that a TheMercenary attitude was even being used on a sixteen year old - Duck_Duck.

Appreciate a different TheMercenary who provided a logical discussion of factors that may contribute to crime. That posted for factual discussion and information rather than to attack others with a political agenda.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

TheMercenary - you complain when one finally posts at you as you were doing repeatedly? The big black kettle sees itself in the mirror - and complains? Suddenly you don't like when tw duplicates your own agenda?

TheMercenary. You do yourself a big favor by learning the difference between logical replies verses emotional and poltically inspired attacks. Suddenly you don't like a mirror image of yourself? I would have ignored it except that a TheMercenary attitude was even being used on a sixteen year old - Duck_Duck.

Appreciate a different TheMercenary who provided a logical discussion of factors that may contribute to crime. That posted for factual discussion and information rather than to attack others with a political agenda.

I like Duck_Duck and have said so from the beginning. So what's your point?

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I like Duck_Duck and have said so from the beginning. So what's your point?

Whether you like Duck_Duck is obviously and clearly irrelevant. I need not repeat a point you clearly understood and intentionally deny. You have just posted something irrelevant so as to avoid a bluntly posted reality. Your latest post repeats a deception and deceit that are, for you, situation normal.

You know exactly what my point is. Trying to avoid that reality by deceptive replies is so characterisitc of those driven by a political agenda. How curious. You have just replied as Rumsfeld did everytime he was accused providing too few troops. He also put a political agenda ahead of reality. Deceptive replies don't change reality. You know exact what my point is.

[Undertoad]

Well they should have booked 'em the minute they ordered dogs! There's only one reason why you'd use dogs in an overcrowded prison, and that's for torture!

Because dogs and dog collars and leashes can be used for torture!

I'm not sure exactly how! Every time I've worn a dog collar it was all in fun!

But I'm sure they can, and only the most devious mind can figure out how to use dogs for torture, which is why it's proof it came to the top!

Maybe the dogs apply hot irons to the prisoners! I don't know! These are Army dogs, they're really smart!

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Well they should have booked 'em the minute they ordered dogs! There's only one reason why you'd use dogs in an overcrowded prison, and that's for torture!

Somewhere in the so many reports about Abu Ghriad, I recall a Navy dog handler withdrew his dog and refused to participate with the abuse in Tier 1A and 1B. I remember wondering why Navy dog handlers might be more responsible than Army ones.

Go Navy. Beat Army ... instead.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Somewhere in the so many reports about Abu Ghriad, I recall a Navy dog handler withdrew his dog and refused to participate with the abuse in Tier 1A and 1B. I remember wondering why Navy dog handlers might be more responsible than Army ones.

Go Navy. Beat Army ... instead.

Navy dogs are not nearly as smart as Army Dogs. But Navy dogs swim better.