America's pandering twat-hole sidesteps the issue, says he's not sure if waterboarding qualifies as torture.
"It depends on how it is done; it depends on the circumstances; it depends on who does it. I think the way it has been defined in the media, it shouldn’t be done. I would say if that is the description of it, then I can agree that it shouldn’t be done," he said, adding that he doesn’t necessarily trust the media's description and has yet to learn "what the real description of it is."Um, dude, clue? Laying back while a hot buff naked guy pours warm, soothing liquids over you = good, forced to lie on your back while some hairy beefy goon fucking tries to hurt you = bad. Unless maybe you're Rudy Giuliani, I guess.
Giuliani's stance indicates a subtle softening of his position on interrogation, five months after he declared that he would approve of "every method" one could think of to squeeze information from suspects.I love this: "a subtle softening." Now just imagine if a Dem had waffled like that: terrist sympathizer! Flipflopping on national security! Siding with the terrists! America-hater!!
Giuliani’s lack of a clear-cut position on a key national security issue is noteworthy for a candidate who has made the war on terrorism a cornerstone of his campaign and prides himself on being straightforward with voters. He told an audience last week, "You’re going to always know where I stand."Yeah. Meanwhile, Romney would just prefer it to be on a confidential basis with his team of lawyers.
"Uhhh, yeah. Just how big a touchhole are you anyway, Mr Romney?"
No comments:
Post a Comment