Jump to content
IGNORED

Sarah Palin: Waterboarding is how we'd baptize terrorists


16strong

Recommended Posts

The Tundra Twat opens her mouth and shows that the lights are on, but Ms. Brain has long since departed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christians fight back

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/04/29 ... s-torture/

When Sarah Palin told a crowd on Saturday that America would baptize terrorists by torturing them if she were President, she disgraced the Christian religion. She also angered Christians everywhere. Her remarks disgusted one Christian organization so much that they created a petition condemning her and called upon the media to report how true Christians feel about torture. (Subheader) Sarah Palin is a disgrace to the Christian religion. Faithful America writes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure who I hate more-Republican Teabaggers like Skanky Palin or Al-Qaeda terrorists.

Both terrorist groups use religion to justify advocating murder of innocent people and to try destroying human rights. It's scary how much they are alike. Al Qaeda has just done a better job so far of getting killing done. I wouldn't put it past Teabaggers to not kill as many people, if not more people, if given the chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who's job requires a lot of just standing Without moving... Yeah it is torture. 4 hours doesn't seem like long to me because I do it for longer, and I don't get a lot of breaks, it's still too long. Besides, I get to have shoe inserts, which help, and take foot baths at night.

My husband too. He comes home in a lot of pain. He'll try shifting from one foot to the other, but that doesn't help a whole lot. Our feet are meant for walking, not for standing there with all our weight putting pressure on our feet without stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm seriously not all that faithful in the Christian faith anymore, yet I can't help be offended by this on the grounds of Baptism being a really sacred part of the faith. Like whether or not you believe in christenings or believers baptism, its still a declaration of faith and induction into the church itself. It is one of the most sacred acts of the whole umbrella of Christianity. To use "Baptism" so flippantly in the context of enemies of the state seems like a disrespect to the very faith this woman apparently wants to bring to the world.

Not to mention torture is about the least christlike thing a person could carry out, much less in the name of cleansing them of their sins. Disgusting. Then again, she's about as dim as a flashlight on its last breath, so I shouldn't be surprised.

I agree so hard that liking your post wasn't enough. It's so disgusting how people like this feign being actual Christians just to garner votes and impress people. There is something really sick in stating, essentially, that Jesus would have waterboarded people. I can't see any real christian who tries to live a christ-like life believing that.

It offends me, and I don't even believe in Christianity or the Jesus definitely existed as believed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did, and has continued to do so. His people did not vet her as stongly as they might have other candidates, I don't remember exactly why.

I'm taking a seminar course on torture this year, and one of our topics for discussion was the amount of people who don't believe that waterboarding constitutes torture. Same with other methods of "enhanced interrogation," such as forced standing. Here's a quote from Donald Rumsfeld: "I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?"

I believe the vetting process for Sarah Palin consisted of the following questions:

1) Are you a Republican?

2) do you currently hold a political office?

3) are you reasonably attractive?

4) do you have a vagina?

If Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic nomination the vetting process would have consisted of the same questions, except #4 would have been are you a non-white male?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the vetting process for Sarah Palin consisted of the following questions:

1) Are you a Republican?

2) do you currently hold a political office?

3) are you reasonably attractive?

4) do you have a vagina?

If Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic nomination the vetting process would have consisted of the same questions, except #4 would have been are you a non-white male?

According to the book Game Change, this is pretty much exactly the vetting process for Palin. While the book apparently has inaccuracies, this does not appear to be one of them. :pull-hair:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christians fight back

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/04/29 ... s-torture/

When Sarah Palin told a crowd on Saturday that America would baptize terrorists by torturing them if she were President, she disgraced the Christian religion. She also angered Christians everywhere. Her remarks disgusted one Christian organization so much that they created a petition condemning her and called upon the media to report how true Christians feel about torture. (Subheader) Sarah Palin is a disgrace to the Christian religion. Faithful America writes:

DailyKos has a diary with the same links to the Faithful America petition.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/2 ... arah-Palin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought John McCain took a strong stance against torture (at least that's how I remember it when he was running for president in 2007), after his years as a POW in Vietnam. Didn't he ask Palin about her opinions before he asked her to run as his VP?

I am not convinced she was his choice, per se. I believe she was a pick to keep the ultra right in the game, and some handlyers/money people/stragegists picked or helped pick her. That said, I know a few republicans who voted for Obama specifically because she was on the ticket--and her beliefs were unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both terrorist groups use religion to justify advocating murder of innocent people and to try destroying human rights. It's scary how much they are alike. Al Qaeda has just done a better job so far of getting killing done. I wouldn't put it past Teabaggers to not kill as many people, if not more people, if given the chance.

That's the scary thing about these religious fanatic Teabaggers, as they're just as willing as Al-Qaeda to kill nonbelievers. I do think that if given a chance, these Teabaggers would use nuclear weapons against Islamic countries just to wipe out a large group of people who aren't Christian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.