你可以告訴本人布希用的是啥極刑嗎?

"通常"來講, 擁護歐巴馬的人是不太會能夠容忍不同意見, 這點本人已經領教了.

關於極刑不極刑, 本人也寫過很長的貼文了, 不過看樣子你們也沒讀. 如果讀了你也不會寫你寫的東西了.我也沒辦法一定要你們讀, 你們還是閉著眼睛胡謅吧. 本人也不會介意俗語說

的好; 可以把一匹馬領到水邊,卻無法強迫它喝水.

Jariel, 你所擺出的姿態及顛覆是非令人震驚, 連我這樣温和的讀者也希望你盡快消失。我們上網是希望看「邱鴻安專欄」及一些理性分析,你的思想太可怕了。

>>>並且濫用極刑,令美國人在世界各國的鄙視眼光下抬不起頭<<<

告訴你這無知幼稚的 Obama supporter 何為濫用極刑...

倫敦泰晤士報報導，這捲45分鐘的錄影帶顯示，阿聯大公國元首的同父異母弟弟以薩在一名制服警察協助下，無情地凌虐這名阿富汗穀物商，不僅用趕牛尖棒和釘有鐵釘的木板再三毆打他，還火燒他的生殖器，以賓士車輾壓他數次，並以自動步槍掃射他周邊沙地，用鹽水潑灑他傷口。以薩聲稱這名穀商欺騙他。

你們無知到是非不分的地步了!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have written a bunch of posts in other 邱鴻安專欄 as well. I am glad some of us still have the sense and courage to call things as they are and not be influenced by popular opinions...especially those of liberal elitist.

All great leaders in the world are misunderstood. GW Bush has the potential to be one of the greatest Presidents ever, if and when peace spreads to rest of Middle East from Iraq. Bush will hailed as the man that solved the 1000-year-old conflicts in that region. Take a good look at the success in Asia. This is NOT to say that this is a man without flaws, because he has plenty. Keep in mind that the great Theodore Roosevelt was not all that popular during his time, either. Many thought that he was too "cowboy". Today, his face is on the Mount Rushmore with 3 other great ones. Bush's influence in Middle East could have long-lasting effects on the region. But I won't be surprised someday the liberals would give that credit to Obama...

閣下也不須回應本人﹑本人更不回希罕你們這些不用大腦思考無知的讀者回答. 況且你們也回答不出啥子名堂有本領把本人寫的東西指出不對啊! 除了會罵布希還知道什麼? 瞧不起你們1

Jariel 最好從此消失。

Jariel，我對你有兩點建議:

1. 你應去看心理醫生;

2. 你既然不喜歡別人美言歐巴馬, 你可以自己設一個部落格去歌頌你心目中的上帝布希, 何必在這裏留言,既吃力又不討好。

我是不會再回應你的了, 實在是對牛彈琴。

我對你有兩點建議:

1. 你應去看心理醫生;

2. 你既然不喜歡別人美言歐巴馬, 你可以自己設一個部落格去歌頌你心目中的上帝布希, 何必在這裏留言,既吃力又不討好。

我是不會再回應你的了, 實在是對牛彈琴。

--------------------------------------------

喜萊莉解釋說，美國不僅要修補與別國政府的關係，也要修補與別國人民的關係；她當然不會認為，單單這種與民眾的聯繫，就可以改善美國與別國之間的關係，但是這些與民接觸的活動，應該有助於改善美國與別國的關係。喜萊莉第一天到國務院上任時就說到，她會以「巧實力」(smart power)去推動外交；在官方會面以外，再與民眾有所互動，看來就是「巧實力」的一種發揮。

從與民眾接觸這個角度去看，喜萊莉這次亞洲行是極之順利和愉快的；不過，這次原屬於獨當一面的外交之旅，卻也反映出，她始終無法擺脫兩個人的影響。

第一個當然是柯林頓，因為喜萊莉現在推行的美國對華政策，脫離不了柯林頓當年制訂的中美合作範圍。喜萊莉這次中國行，引起最大的批評是，她降低了人權問題在中美關係中的重要性，因為她不希望人權問題影響到中美兩國的合作─合作化解金融危機、以及合作對付全球暖化。但是，這種不讓人權問題影響到兩國就其他事情合作的政策，自中美於1970年代建交以來就是如此，尤其是在六四事件以後的柯林頓時期為然。

另外一個當然是喜萊莉的新老闆歐巴馬，因為她推行的美國與華合作政策，必然也是歐巴馬的政策。除了對華政策，喜萊莉還不時顯露出歐巴馬對她的影響；當記者問到，為什麼民眾會那樣歡迎她時，她就不忘提到，歐巴馬總統具有比她更大的親和力，當他與人接觸時，會發出真實感情，因此更受歡迎。新老闆的影子，真的無處不在。

看來，在外交政策上難以獨立的喜萊莉，只能在靈巧的民眾外交上擺脫別人的影子。對於她的「民眾外交」，喜萊莉說，將會用在其他國家的外交工作上；換句話說，在未來的一段時間裏，這名世人感到親切熟悉的國務卿，將會代表美國，到處與各國民眾打交道，作互動交流。(世界日報，2.24.2009)

-------------------------------------------------

昨天才拿熱臉貼..cough, cough ...

今天的新聞; 喜萊莉說，中國和伊朗在拉丁美洲勢力坐大令人不安，「他們正與許多這些領袖建立非常強大的經濟和政治關係。我不認為這符合我們的利益,國務卿喜萊莉‧柯林頓1日為歐巴馬政府拉攏拉丁美洲的反美領袖辯護，宣稱這是為了對抗中國、俄國和伊朗在西半球擴展勢力。

這就是給你們這些只會隨著邱鴻安起舞而不用自己大腦思考讀者們的清脆一巴掌!!!

Ohhh BY THE WAY, koby...you never did read the documents released by Depeartment of Justice regarding BUSH TOTURE...did you?

I would strongly suggest that you do some reading before you shoot off your mouth next time. it only goes to show how..igggg...ehhh well...

JUST READ THE FOLLOWING POST REGARDING "BUSH TORTURE"

Without any pretense of an argument, which liberals are neurologically incapable of, the mainstream media are now asserting that our wussy interrogation techniques at Guantanamo constituted "torture" and have irreparably harmed America's image abroad.

Only the second of those alleged facts is true: The president's release of the Department of Justice interrogation memos undoubtedly hurt America's image abroad, as we are snickered at in capitals around the world, where they know what real torture is. The Arabs surely view these memos as a pack of lies. What about the pills Americans have to turn us gay?

The techniques used against the most stalwart al-Qaida members, such as Abu Zubaydah, included one terrifying procedure referred to as "the attention grasp." As described in horrifying detail in the Justice Department memo, the "attention grasp" consisted of:

"(G)rasping the individual with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, in a controlled and quick motion. In the same motion as the grasp, the individual is drawn toward the interrogator."

The end.

There are rumors that Dick "Darth Vader" Cheney wanted to take away the interrogators' Altoids before they administered "the grasp," but Department of Justice lawyers deemed this too cruel.

And that's not all! As the torments were gradually increased, next up the interrogation ladder came "walling." This involves pushing the terrorist against a flexible wall, during which his "head and neck are supported with a rolled hood or towel that provides a C-collar effect to prevent whiplash."

People pay to have a lot rougher stuff done to them at Six Flags Great Adventure. Indeed, with plastic walls and soft neck collars, "walling" may be the world's first method of "torture" in which all the implements were made by Fisher-Price.

As the memo darkly notes, walling doesn't cause any pain, but is supposed to induce terror by making a "loud noise": "(T)he false wall is in part constructed to create a loud sound when the individual hits it, which will further shock and surprise." (!!!)

If you need a few minutes to compose yourself after being subjected to that horror, feel free to take a break from reading now. Sometimes a cold compress on the forehead is helpful, but don't let it drip or you might end up waterboarding yourself.

The CIA's interrogation techniques couldn't be more ridiculous if they were out of Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition sketch:

Cardinal! Poke her with the soft cushions! ...

Hmm! She is made of harder stuff! Cardinal Fang! Fetch ... THE COMFY CHAIR!

So you think you are strong because you can survive the soft cushions. Well, we shall see. Biggles! Put her in the Comfy Chair! ...

Now -- you will stay in the Comfy Chair until lunchtime, with only a cup of coffee at 11.

Further up the torture ladder -- from Guantanamo, not Monty Python -- comes the "insult slap," which is designed to be virtually painless, but involves the interrogator invading "the individual's personal space."

If that doesn't work, the interrogator shows up the next day wearing the same outfit as the terrorist. (Awkward.)

I will spare you the gruesome details of the CIA's other comical interrogation techniques and leap directly to the penultimate "torture" in their arsenal: the caterpillar

In this unspeakable brutality, a harmless caterpillar is placed in the terrorist's cell. Justice Department lawyers expressly denied the interrogators' request to trick the terrorist into believing the caterpillar was a "stinging insect."

Human rights groups have variously described being trapped in a cell with a live caterpillar as "brutal," "soul-wrenching" and, of course, "adorable."

If the terrorist manages to survive the non-stinging caterpillar maneuver -- the most fiendish method of torture ever devised by the human mind that didn't involve being forced to watch "The View" -- CIA interrogators had another sadistic trick up their sleeves.

I am not at liberty to divulge the details, except to mention the procedure's terror-inducing name: "the ladybug."

Finally, the most savage interrogation technique at Guantanamo was "waterboarding," which is only slightly rougher than the Comfy Chair.

Thousands of our troops are waterboarded every year as part of their training, but not until it was done to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- mastermind of the 9/11 attack on America -- were liberal consciences shocked.

I think they were mostly shocked because they couldn't figure out how Joey Buttafuoco ended up in Guantanamo.

As non-uniformed combatants, all of the detainees at Guantanamo could have been summarily shot on the battlefield under the Laws of War.

Instead, we gave them comfy chairs, free lawyers, better food than is served in Afghani caves, prayer rugs, recreational activities and top-flight medical care -- including one terrorist who was released, whereupon he rejoined the jihad against America, after being fitted for an expensive artificial leg at Guantanamo, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.

Only three terrorists -- who could have been shot -- were waterboarded. This is not nearly as bad as "snowboarding," which is known to cause massive buttocks pain and results in approximately 10 deaths per year.

Normal human beings -- especially those who grew up with my older brother, Jimmy -- can't read the interrogation memos without laughing.

At Al-Jazeera, they don't believe these interrogation memos are for real. Muslims look at them and say: THIS IS ALL THEY'RE DOING? We do that for practice. We do that to our friends.

But The New York Times is populated with people who can't believe they live in a country where people would put a caterpillar in a terrorist's cell.

But nevertheless and hopefully, you can ask some intelligent questions after reading my piece istead of Bush did this and that "差點傾覆了美國" crap.

Right now the whole world is absurdly against Bush. If he jumped in front of a speeding train to rescue an old woman he would be accused of cynically promoting US rail interests. In time, I'm sure, a more balanced understanding of Bush's achievements, as well as his failures, will emerge. But right now he's about as popular as a Wall Street stockbroker at a pensioners' rally.

Any defence of Bush and his administration must acknowledge its faults because, more than in any other administration, the virtues and the vices have been two sides of the same coin. Bush's biggest failing was his inability to speak persuasively to an international audience. His stubbornness, which is courage if you look at it a different way, was amplified for foreign audiences a thousand times by the Texan accent. In rejecting elite American opinion, he too often looked as though he was rejecting international opinion. In dismissing The New York Times, he seemed to dismiss Europe.

His other big fault was his failure to exert himself to ensure his administration was unified, especially during its first term. Having appointed big beasts such as Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld, Bush needed to stamp his authority on them more and adjudicate their disputes.

Instead, the Bush administration looked at times like a medieval court with warring princes under a troubled king. It got better during the second term.

Third, there were bad mistakes in implementation in Iraq. There was also a failure to pursue energy independence, even to the point of resisting fuel efficiency improvements in motor vehicles, which was part of a broader failure to articulate a coherent response to climate change, where his record was better than his rhetoric.

Finally, there was a failure on hiswatch to properly overseeing the financial system, a failure he shares in full measure with congressional Democrats.

Now, the successes. Barack Obama in some measure owes his success to the inclusiveness of Bush. Bush appointed Powell secretary of state. He appointed Condoleezza Rice national security adviser, then Secretary of State. Over eight years, this accustomed the electorate to African-Americans handling critical national security positions. No other president, certainly no Democrat, had done anything like it. Bush was always a liberal on race, always way ahead of his party on immigration and the need for Republicans to woo racial minorities, particularly Hispanics. Without embracing the rhetoric of identity politics, he simply did things that advanced racial equality.

More important, especially for Australia, Bush was an immensely successful president in Asia. When Bush was first elected there was great fear of a conflict between the US and China. Instead, Bush from the start pursued a steady, productive and stable relationship with China. He didn't sell out Taiwan but he shrewdly and effectively manipulated downwards the vote of its pro-independence candidates by withholding US favour from them. He resisted any protectionist moves against Beijing. He had a much better China relationship than Bill Clinton did.

Similarly, the US-India nuclear deal, which symbolises the entire new strategic relationship with India, compares in historical import with Richard Nixon's opening to China. Likewise with Japan. Bush encouraged Tokyo to become an independent strategic partner within the framework of the US alliance. This removes the crippling psychological burden of strategic client status for Japan and, by making the US-Japan alliance militarily reciprocal, enormously strengthens the US position in North Asia.

The US reduced the footprint of its troop presence in Japan and South Korea while keeping those alliances strong. It re-established a healthy priority for Southeast Asia. US poll figures in most of Asia were better towards the end of the Bush administration than at its start.

On environmental front; his decision in 2001 to jettison the Kyoto global warming treaty so loved by Al Gore, the environmental lobby, elite opinion, and Europeans. The treaty was a disaster, with India and China exempted and economic decline the certain result. Everyone knew it. But only Bush said so and acted accordingly.

Bush doesn't get the credit he deserves for greatly increasing US aid to Africa, especially on AIDS. In reality no Democratic president would have done more.

Much of history's judgment of Bush will turn on Iraq and Afghanistan. This post, in what is certainly a minority position, believes the Iraq operation was the right thing to do on the basis of the information available and Bush was courageous to do it. More recently, Bush defied all his advisers to implement the troop surge that turned Iraq from a catastrophe to a chance of success. I wanted to document these items from Barnes "for the record"….so that when some liberal blogger in six months tries to claim that Obama’s ascension somehow won the war in Iraq, or that Obama somehow "repaired" ties to Asian countries, including India, I can direct them back to this point in time ( and this blog post) to the truth.

This President, infinitely more complex than his reviews would suggest, will have a better place in history than most of his critics.