Why Would Hillary Rather See My Kids' Entire School District Nuked Than For Her to Torture One Terrorist in ..

Question

... order to save the kids?

Oddly, Bill said he would definitely make the right choice --- protecting the kids. Hillary disagreed with him.

Sad?

Bill said he would try to torture a terrorist if he thought it could save such kids. Hillary says Bill is wrong.

Would you want Hillary to let your kids get nuked?

Do your teen kids think Hillary should let them and their friends get nuked? What do you think? Kill the kids and save the terrorist?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1c10kwZWL4

Odd how hateful Libs ignore that Bill answered a very similar question on Meet the Press.

What does that say about YA Dems?

Answer 1

I say we waterboard Hillary to get her to tell the truth for once.

Answer 2

Because that would be the liberal thing to do. It seems the liberals mindset is let's NOT take a chance that a terrorist civil rights MIGHT be violated. After all we don't KNOW the terrorist has the information we need. And the waterboard is such torture.

Ask any Navy Aircrew who's been through SEER school just how painful the water board is. It's extremely distressing, but painful it isn't. While you are at it, ask them if they think it would be effective.

What the question to Hillary and others of like mind is, given the choice between the right of a terrorist and the rights of kids, which would you choose?

Answer 3

Look... it's a fairytale world that some of these people live in when they profess that it's never ok to torture someone.
I doubt they'd be screaming for the rights of the terrorist if it were their loved one in harm's way unless the information could be obtained to save them.
I think this deserves to be a separate question to see what they think when it's a bit closer to home. It's easy to declare waterboarding as cruel torture and deplore its use when you aren't connected to the potential victims...

Answer 4

I'm not a fan of hers and would never consider voting for her. Having said that, this is a complete and deliberate misrepresentation. Concern about protecting civil rights- i.e. maintaining that allegations of terrorism should be proven beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt in a court of law, as opposed to shipping suspects to internment camps without any transparency or accountability whatsoever, is not tantamount to supporting terrorism or nuclear confrontation.
By the way... the first person who answered this "question" is right on target.

Answer 5

I don't know why you keep saying nuked and terrorist all in the same sentence. It's hard enough for countries to get nukes let alone a terrorist group who has no home base to produce nukes. Terrorists don't have nukes kid. What you're trying to say is that if it comes down to it....will we nuke the terrorists if needed....that was the question.

Answer 6

COME on. i understand that bipartisan hatred cuts deep, yet do you fairly think of anybody working for president on the two element, or any of their cabinent individuals, might stop wanting doing each little thing of their potential to stop us from being nuked?? it particularly is lots greater handy to villify the competition than that's to particularly examine up on the matters and make an cautioned decision, yet enable's no longer be lazy, please?

Answer 7

wow....I hope you are only pretending to be not playing with a full deck.

Your very question is proof positive that you are a person that cannot be taken seriously and that you are juvenile in your thought process. The other thing your question does is raise the issue of how can someone this ignorant be on the right side of a political divide? My answer is not likely.

Answer 8

It called lying. Really thats a tough question and it's easier to lie that say you'll allow torture. Of course she would use torture. It's the SOP. You just don't advertise that.

Answer 9

So you are admitting that our military and the Department of Homeland Security are not able to protect us from nukes. If that is the case it will be more than your kids' school that would be destroyed. Typical con scare tactic.

Answer 10

If you have to torture people to get information to save people... then you've already lost the battle and waited too long.

We should know what the terrorists are going to do before they do, and shouldn't have to rely on such archaic techniques.

Answer 11

You probabaly believe in suitcase nukes...don't you? Come on, admit it, you think there's a terrorist out there carrying around a minitiarized nuclear bomb in a bag....