DISQUS

RainbowPhoenix · 1 year ago

Oh lord, I honestly don't know what to say to this.

pdxprobert · 1 year ago

So he's claiming what we should be allowed to do to enemies of our state, should also be available as retribution against American soldiers too...how can we claim special privileges to treat prisoners of war/enemy combatants in any way we deem appropriate and not think that the opposition won't see that as an endorsement to do the same to American prisoners of war? ....... and he's a leader in our military... how can anybody under his leadership respect him...

wmforr · 1 year ago

In FANTASTIC 4: THE RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER, the interrogator says to the captive Surfer. "There are certain things I'm not allowed to do because they're human rights violations. Fortunately, you're not human."

And he smiles. So very Cheney, so very Rove. In fact all too many in this country have that attitude. If you aren't American, you aren't human. It's curious with such a racially mixed population we still have those who think we are the Master Race.

pdxprobert · 1 year ago

Do you think it might have to do with the over religiosity of our nation and how the religious right has been courted by both parties? Supremacy is the foundation of fundamentalism... and supremacy is certainly the root belief for those whose support master race self images.....

wmforr · 1 year ago

I am still waiting for the pro-water-torture (boarding makes it sound like some kind of game) crowd has proposed no bills in Congress to exonerate the Japanese that we sent to jail and/or exeuction for it at the end of WWII.

CMcC · 1 year ago

You quote retired U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kurt Lippold : ''We shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights..."

Uh, Kurt, ever heard these words?: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowded by their creator with certain unalienable righs, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that governments are instituted among men to secure these rights, ..."

A pretty big "policy decision" was made on the basis of this belief in "human rights" back in 1776. Know what I'm talking about, Kurt?

Dave of the Jungle · 1 year ago

" As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. "

tbhull · 1 year ago

Somebody needs to remind unelected Mr. "Yes sir Mr. Obama" 24/7 military boy of his role. Obama should order this clown to White House toiet and shoe shine detail immediately so that he hopefully better understands his role.

rakksanmoo · 1 year ago

As a retired Army officer I have only this to say: mdr Kurt Lippold, former captain of the U.S.S. Cole, is directly responsible for the deaths of the sailors who were killed under his command. Knowing that he was anchored in a high-risk environment, he nonetheless permitted a zodiac boat operated by terrorists to get close enough to his vessel to almost sink it. It's a scandal that he wasn't court martialled for dereliction of duty and endangering his ship and crew. A more intelligent and reflective man would realize that presuming to share his inane opinions about national defense is the last thing he should be doing. He should shut the hell up and thank God he's not serving time in Leavenworth.

Rob · 1 year ago

To Rakksanmoo: "As a retired Army officer", I think you you should educate yourself before you "speak". It is reported that on the day the USS Cole was bombed, there were numerous work boats sailing about the harbor. There were USS Cole sailors on deck that were on security watch. It is also reported that the boat that rammed into the Cole with explosives was steered towards the Cole with the operators waving and smiling. I suppose you would give orders to shoot smiling civilians of a country you are visiting? In retrospect, the best way to have prevented this unprecedented attack was to have a boom in the water around the Cole with boats patrolling around the vessel, which is now done. You said you are a retired Army officer. If you are a U.S. Army Officer, please know all the facts before you try to degrade a US Navy Officer. It seems it is you who should be more "intelligent and reflective" before sharing your opinions. To the others on this board, I believe Cmdr Lippold was saying that we shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights GROUPS and was NOT saying we shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights. There is a difference. By the way, I say this as a present US Merchant Marine Officer

rakksanmoo · 1 year ago

Thank you for your recent email. My inbox is protected by ChoiceMail One, the leader in anti-spam technology. ChoiceMail is holding the message you sent because your email address is not on my list of approved senders.

Please click on the link below. This will take you to a sender verification page. Sender verification is a one-time process which takes only a few seconds. This will let me add you to my list of approved senders and receive your original email.

ChoiceMail sender verification: http://cm.digiportal.com/php/CR/cmregister.php?...

Please be aware that if you do not complete sender verification within 4 days, ChoiceMail will automatically delete your original message.

To find out how ChoiceMail can make you spam free, please visit http://www.digiportal.com

ObamaRocks! · 1 year ago

Typical fascist military man. I truly feel sorry for the good people in the military who have to take orders from pricks like this.

CMcC · 1 year ago

Ok, Kurt, so I botched the order of the last phrase I quoted from the Declaration. Well, I've got another one for you, and I've calmed down enough to actually check it out and check it over to make sure it's right.

Here goes: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law..." Those words are from the 5th Amendment.

Isn't it inconvenient for you that Jefferson (and his associates) used the word "all" and Madison (and his associates) used the phrase "no person"? If only they had not been so, uh, so human. But, as an American, you're stuck with these founding documents.

What's that phrase we used to hear so much, something about America, love it or leave it?

Milli · 1 year ago

That comment is frightening beyond belief.

Whatever..! · 1 year ago

Whatever..!

He should be grateful that he now has a Commander In Chief that does not think having a dissenting view is unpatriotic and does not let loose his hacks into his personal life and personal files.

Gridlock · 1 year ago

That's traitor talk. To GITMO with him.

Dave of the Jungle · 1 year ago

The Nobel Prize for Flatulence

eclare · 1 year ago

Where to begin?

Even leaving behind those silly "human rights" things people are always going on about, is he honestly saying that policy doesn't need to follow the law? That....makes no sense.

Second: how about we make policy decisions based on efficacy? In that case, Barack Obama's orders were still exactly the right thing to do. Why do these nutjobs persist in their belief that their ridiculous policies worked?

Actually, I know the answer to that. Having allowed torture to occur, one must stubbornly hold on to the belief that it was the right thing to do or else actually have to face the guilt and torment that comes with the realization that you have ruined lives for no good reason. Eventually, Commander, those chickens will come home to roost. Better to face up to your mistakes now while there may still be time to atone.


Jerk.

Griffon · 1 year ago

This could have something to do with his attitude:

Commander of USS Cole denied promotion
September 01, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nearly six years after the deadly terrorist attack on the USS Cole, the Navy has decided that the officer who was skipper of the ship is not qualified for a promotion that had been in limbo since 2002.

The attack killed 17 sailors and nearly sank the destroyer in Aden harbor, Yemen. A Navy investigation concluded in 2001 that Cmdr. Kirk Lippold and his crew probably could not have prevented the attack and should not be punished.

But in a written statement Monday, the Navy said Secretary Donald C. Winter concluded after reviewing the matter that Lippold's actions before the attack on October 12, 2000, "did not meet the high standard" expected of commanding officers.

Based on that assessment, Winter determined that Lippold was "not the best and fully qualified for promotion to the higher grade" of captain, said a Navy spokesman, Cmdr. David Werner.

http://www.abledangerblog.com/2006/09/commander...

SCLiberal · 1 year ago

Why should his opinion count any more than any of ours? Besides that, he is wrong.

jt307 · 1 year ago

Obviously his opinion matters more than all others because he was commanding a ship when it was attacked, henceforth, he is an expert on prevention of terrorism and constitutional law. Just as Mr Bush is an expert on foreign relations, Islamic culture, aeronautics, building construction, constitutional law, and terrorism prevention because he was the commander in chief when 9-11 happened. Have you not been keeping up. Overseeing failure automatically assures expertise in any and all fields directly or indirectly involved or affected by said failure. This is why the best people to lead banks on the brink of failure back to solvency is in fact the same people who created the failure. This is why nearly half of the country wanted a guy most famous for failing to complete a sortie in Vietnam and the resulting imprisonment for said failure to oversee and command our military.

Most of us fail at achieving greatness because we strive for success. If we just aimed for utter failure a little more often, we would all reach our full potential as experts.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

Just as Mr Bush is an expert on foreign relations, Islamic culture, aeronautics, building construction, constitutional law, and terrorism prevention because he was the commander in chief when 9-11 happened.
---

I thought his ability to color the books and stay inside the lines made him an expert in all those things...

oh, and his legacy as a bush.

catdance · 1 year ago

He's the captain whose ship got attacked on his watch. So he's kinda defensive from the get-go. Kinda like ChimpyCo had to overreact because they let the US get attacked by failing to read their daily intelligence.

And yeah, they're all wrong because they're reacting in "c y a" mode rather than with their intellect.

Poopyman · 1 year ago

Well, I'm not sure John pulled out the worst quote in the article. I read that as Cmdr (R) Lippold saying we shouldn't base policy decisions on Human Rights groups and legal advocacy groups.

Regardless, further down in the McClatchy article he says worse about the order to suspend the Gitmo trials.

That move, Lippold said, would be "a tragic, politically based mistake. We are now politicizing the war on terrorism . . . an order of magnitude worse than anything we've done."

Ummmm, now we're politicizing the GWOT? WTF?

And it gets worse:

"To bring them to the U.S. and give them the same constitutional rights that we as American citizens have earned is an affront to the decency of these families and should absolutely not be allowed."

Quite the patriot, aintcha Sparky?

eclare · 1 year ago

This is priceless:
"To bring them to the U.S. and give them the same constitutional rights that we as American citizens have earned is an affront to the decency of these families and should absolutely not be allowed."

Yeah, being born in the US was a lot of hard work. I sure have earned me those constitutional rights.

Idiot - privileges are earned, rights just are.

To be clear, Lippold is the idiot, not you, poopyman.

catdance · 1 year ago

What these knee-jerk neocons glibly overlook is that it's NOT a case of "giving THEM the same Constitutional rights that we as Americans have."

It is a matter of we, as Americans, acting within the confines of our Constitution.

wmforr · 1 year ago

Check that out again. He says "the same constitutional rights that we as American citizens have EARNED."

Remember that part about "certain inalienable rights"? Now we are told that these rights are not the heritage of all mankind as the Constitution says, but must be EARNED. You must EARN the right to a fair trial. You must EARN the right to the pursuit of happiness. And you earn it exactly how? Well, by being BORN in the right place. It is a conscious decision. Those who chose to be born elsewhere have failed to earn these rights.

Do the schools teach civics any more?

wmforr · 1 year ago

Oops! Forgot to hit the login button. Now you can all see my handsome face.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

and a handsome one it is indeed :-)

catdance · 1 year ago

Are you thinking I was agreeing with him? I wasn't.
I was saying that we as Americans are bound to extend the rights given in the Constitution to the Gitmo prisoners. The Constitution doesn't just GIVE us rights; we, in turn, are bound by those rights in our dealings with others.

Indigo · 1 year ago

The Obstructionist Party consolidates its anti-people policies.

tbenson · 1 year ago

Fishing to join the ranks of Ollie et. al. as a Fox news commentator?

J · 1 year ago

I thought Jimmy Pohl ordered the prision to remain open.
Go JL Pohl.
JCB from CCC in Compton

caphillprof · 1 year ago

I'd take away their pensions and/or call them back to active duty . . . in Afghanistan.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

''We shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights and legal advocacy groups,''
---

I wonder how our new President feels about that statement... he being black and all.

some people should think a bit before wagging their tongues.

Rob · 1 year ago

To Rakksanmoo: "As a retired Army officer", I think you you should educate yourself before you "speak". It is reported that on the day the USS Cole was bombed, there were numerous work boats sailing about the harbor. There were USS Cole sailors on deck that were on security watch. It is also reported that the boat that rammed into the Cole with explosives was steered towards the Cole with the operators waving and smiling. I suppose you would give orders to shoot smiling civilians of a country you are visiting? In retrospect, the best way to have prevented this unprecedented attack was to have a boom in the water around the Cole with boats patrolling around the vessel, which is now done. You said you are a retired Army officer. If you are a U.S. Army Officer, please know all the facts before you try to degrade a US Navy Officer. It seems it is you who should be more "intelligent and reflective" before sharing your opinions. To the others on this board, I believe Cmdr Lippold was saying that we shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights GROUPS and was NOT saying we shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights. There is a difference. By the way, I say this as a present US Merchant Marine Officer

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

again... read what I posted below and think about it a bit.

we wouldn't HAVE a black President if policy wasn't swayed by advocacy groups.

.

James K. Sayre · 1 year ago

Extending this right-wing moron's "thought" process, we shouldn't base any foreign policy decisions on our Constitution, our Bill of Rights or, gasp, our Declaration of Independence. The residents of third world countries want to be merely left alone, without any US imperial interference in their lives. US out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Somalia. Stop supplying the zionist imperialist Israelis weapons.

MNUSA · 1 year ago

Human rights don't count? What is it all about then?

ProudPatriot · 1 year ago

I, too, am a retired U. S. Navy Commander and I consider Commander Lippold's comments to be repugnant and not befitting an officer who swore an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

Wakien · 1 year ago

Thats got to be a ten on the scale of 1-10 in just plain stupid.
If we shouldnt make policy on human rights than what should we base it on? Does he think it should be based on the corporations bottom line? ..On the color of ones' skin, sex, religion or maybe we should just base it on his favorite lottery numbers...duh.
What is wrong with people that put human rights so low..do they not realize it is also their family and nation that will benifit by being humain?

Bush_Bites · 1 year ago

Advice from a man who couldn't even keep his ship safe from a dingy.

rakksanmoo · 1 year ago

To "Rob" the "present Merchant Marine Officer": As a civilian you should educate yourself into the realities of combat before presuming to disparage a combat officer's observations regarding a combat commander's responsibilities in a hostile environment. Plenty of "smiling, waving civilians" approached our forces in Vietnam and plenty of them were armed with sachel charges to blow us up. It was the officer in charge who was supposed to make the quick call: open fire or not? CMDR Lippton made the wrong call. He allowed "smiling" terrorists to approach within a few feet of the Cole and detonate their charge. The Cole's armed sentries should have had standing orders to kill anyone in a small craft who approached within a specified range (50 meters, minimum). His failure to anticipate this sort of attack, and his failure to instruct his crew to be ready to deal with it, was dereliction of duty, plain and simple. It's no accident that Lippton was deemed unfit for promotion and passed over. I repeat: He's lucky he's not in Leavenworth and he ought to keep his ignorant mouth shut. Sort of like you "Rob."

lysias · 1 year ago

As a retired U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander, I agree with you.

poopsybythebay · 1 year ago

Great answer. CMDR Lippton needs to go spend more time with his family.

Rob · 1 year ago

To rakksanmoo: I want to preface this by saying I truly respect your service to the U.S. but I am disappointed that you are the one who is trying to “disparage” a fellow officer (CMDR Lippold). As a USMM officer, I am formally trained and educated in naval science and in maritime and port security. I am guessing you are not? The Cole’s presence in Aden was not part of a hostile combat environment. It was there to refuel. Do you know how ships refuel? Do you really believe that standing orders for a visiting US Navy vessel refueling should have been to “to kill anyone in a small craft who approached within a specified range (50 meters, minimum.”? Only in hindsight does the answer seem crystal clear. Rules of engagement didn’t allow for them to shoot upon the small boat. Also know that the Cole is designed as a blue water warship for symmetrical warfare. Remember that the USS Cole incident was pre 9-11 and that asymmetrical attack was unprecedented. Read what the Navy and JAG concluded: Commander Kirk Lippold "acted reasonably in adjusting his force protection posture based on his assessment of the situation that presented itself" when Cole arrived in Aden to refuel…….. "the commanding officer of Cole did not have the specific intelligence, focused training, appropriate equipment or on-scene security support to effectively prevent or deter such a determined, preplanned assault on his ship".

rakksanmoo · 1 year ago

To USMM Officer Rob: You are missing two salient points in this discussion of a terrorist attack that should never have succeeded. First, the responsibility for the lives and safety of a military commander's subordinates, be they soldiers or sailors, cannot be delegated. If people under your command die, and a lack foresight, planning, prudence or commonsense on your part in any way contributed to their deaths, the onus is on you. Yes, "higher up" may bear some of the blame for bad strategy or faulty planning, but you, the commander on the ground or the captain of the ship, are the person who is morally and legally responsible, no matter what a later investigation or board of inquiry may rule in some ass-covering effort to make the unacceptable appear unavoidable. The decision to have the Cole re-fuel in port was controversial long before the ship dropped anchor. Lippton could have, but did not, question his misguided orders to re-fuel in a constricted area where is "blue water" vessel might have been at the mercy of an "asymmetrical" adversary. Yemen was indeed a hostile environment, and the country was (and still is) an infamous terrorist haven. Members of CMDR Lippton's crew have gone on record saying that the vessel should have been met at sea by a re-fueling vessel rather than proceeding into a congested port with dubious security (I actually do have some idea of how ships are re-fueled). Moreover, "rules of engagement" are not chiseled into tablets of stone. They are to be changed to reflect the security requirements of the tactical environment. This is another command responsibility that cannot be delegated. Lippton, apparently wearing his "peacetime we're showing the flag hat," never seriously considered that his vessel might be attacked by a small suicide boat. THAT was his first and most serious error -- disregarding the fundamentals of force protection. Everything else devolved from that mistake. The sailors he stationed as lookouts, given the fact that they had no orders regarding what to do if the ship were to be attacked, were, of course, useless. That was Lippton's second fatal error. After failing to adequately assess the situation and determine that his vessel might be vulnerable, he compounded his error by stationing sentries on deck who had neither orders nor means to repel an attack. His sentries should have had standing orders (that's right -- standing orders) to warn away any approaching craft with lights, bullhorn commands or other signals and, finally, with warning shots. After failing to heed warning shots the craft should have been engaged at a specified distance. A well-trained seaman with an M-16 (let alone an M-60, which the Cole had on board) could have disabled that Zodiac before its homicidal occupants got close enough to kill 17 kids and nearly sink the ship. Sorry, Rob. Calling complacency and bad leadership what it is hardly makes me an ogre dissing a fellow officer. Lippton has blood on his hands, and that brings me to the second issue you seem to have trouble with, viz., that Lippton is now, disgracefully in my view, attacking the values of the very Constitution he swore to protect and defend. CMDR Lippton failed his crew on the day his careless inattention left the Cole vulnerable to attack; he fails them again by attacking our new President instead of honestly reflecting on his own culpability in the tragic deaths of the sailors whose lives he was entrusted with. I stand by my original point: Lippton should shut the hell up. As for your thanks regarding my two tours in Vietnam (101st Airborne and 5th Special Forces): you're welcome.

fl79tr · 1 year ago

I'm no legal expert, but did this guy just commit treason? He's sworn to up hold and protect the constitution, but now he's publicly advocating policy that would overturn the constitution. Perhaps it's a stretch, but is it too much to ask of the people we pay to have do a job, that they actually do their fucking job? I'm not just talking about this clown, I'm also talking about the people who are in charge of him. Really this is just a tired old right wing tactic. They use the symbolism of this guys position, and the fact that if he can say his lines with a straight face he'll probably come off looking serious and pragmatic to try to spook people who disagree with them. Usually at this point the Dems get all scared, and start apologizing for advocating crazy things like human rights and a society not based on anarchy. We'll see what happens.

Pyre · 1 year ago

"did this guy just commit treason?" No. Look up the (very clear and simple) definition. He hasn't provided aid and comfort to an enemy, and, in fact, absent a declared state of war, there legally isn't an enemy he could have given aid and comfort to. No declared war, no treason.

fl79tr · 1 year ago

Thanks !!

Pyre · 1 year ago

Printed with the right font on the right paper, this little quote will look just so cute posted next to my replica of the Bill of Rights!