Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > "Torture-memo-prosecutions" … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … wha      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 1
view profile
History
"Torture-memo-prosecutions" … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?Page 1 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/22/obama-open-to-torture-memo-prosecutions/ …
Obama open to torture memo prosecutions

President eyes policies' authors

President Obama for the first time Tuesday opened the door to prosecuting former Bush administration officials, saying those who approved harsh interrogation techniques for suspected terrorists may be subject to criminal charges.
The president also left open the possibility for an independent commission to examine the interrogations of detainees with techniques that included waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other tactics that defenders said produced valuable information.
The remarks were a reversal from several days ago, when Mr. Obama said he wanted to move forward and his chief of staff appeared to rule out any prosecutions. The president took a harder line after a key congressional committee chairman and liberal pressure groups urged him not to take prosecutions off the table.
Now, Mr. Obama has shifted responsibility for the decision to his Justice Department, saying that although CIA interrogators will be immune from prosecution, the authors of the interrogation policies may still be in trouble.
"With respect to those who formulated those legal decisions, I would say that that is going to be more of a decision for the attorney general," Mr. Obama said. "I don't want to prejudge that."


I'm not sure how I feel about this … can we afford to do this right now?
 oddandy
Joined: 3/5/2008
Msg: 2
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 5:30:00 PM

I'm not sure how I feel about this … can we afford to do this right now?


I think so. I understand the point I've seen you make elsewhere that this is an expense... but I feel it's a worthwhile expense. I feel like our country has been demeaned in SO many ways by the actions of the last administration and it's lackeys, and this is one way that we can help de-soil our littered spirit. I wish we as a nation would stand up against torture, wars of aggression, incarceration without charge, trial or access to council and the myriad of other UN-American things that have been done in our name.
 EarlzP
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 3
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 6:04:04 PM
If we were at war the Geneva convention would apply, if not then the detainies would be entitled to legal representation and a speedy trial.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm


Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.


We either abide by the Geneva Convention or we abandon it, we either enforce the laws or we change them. Whether the detainees were POW'S or criminals their treatment was not optional, the people we elect to represent us are not at liberty to make the laws they have a responsibility to enforce them
 whiskeypapa
Joined: 5/19/2008
Msg: 4
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 6:30:54 PM
Politics is such that if Obama 'a administration gets into serious trouble with the economy or embarassing defeats in war, they will need a circus to distract the electorate.
Public hangings worked well in the past but don't look for any action until after the second year of his administration--timing is everthing.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 5
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 6:48:16 PM

I understand the point I've seen you make elsewhere that this is an expense... but I feel it's a worthwhile expense.
Well yes ... I was thinking of the financial expense of it but also of the political expense as well as the expense of what it would cost the country in more partisan problems.

Of course, even without it, it appears that we seem to be having all kinds of partisan problems, so maybe that wouldn't be anything new. Certainly, if the OBAMA administration .... whether directly or indirectly goes after the "Shrub" administration ... there will be a price to pay. The Republicans will be out for blood (and possibly organs) ... in any way they can get it.

That's basically what I meant when I wrote "can we afford to do this right now?"
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 6
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 7:14:12 PM
I think the best way to handle this is a FULL investigation. At the end of such investigation when all the evidence is fully compiled. I am sure the country will be in a better position to set up a trial for any whom deserve charges.

Yes, we should bring anyone no matter how far up the ladder it goes to justice if it can be proven they broke the law in this matter. My opinion is we should be a nation that believes in justice for all. If any common person does something so egregious and gets caught, we would likely be given life or worse. I find it disgusting if we allow CEOs and presidents to break the laws, catch them then; do nothing at all yet they will punish the rest for the smallest of infractions.



Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Martin Luther King Jr.
 oddandy
Joined: 3/5/2008
Msg: 7
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 8:43:48 PM

Well yes ... I was thinking of the financial expense of it but also of the political expense as well as the expense of what it would cost the country in more partisan problems.

Of course, even without it, it appears that we seem to be having all kinds of partisan problems, so maybe that wouldn't be anything new. Certainly, if the OBAMA administration .... whether directly or indirectly goes after the "Shrub" administration ... there will be a price to pay. The Republicans will be out for blood (and possibly organs) ... in any way they can get it.

That's basically what I meant when I wrote "can we afford to do this right now?"


Ahh, I see what you're saying. You're right though, the rabid partisanship seems to already be here. Some folks are going to be out for blood no matter what. If this were to ratchet it up a notch, so be it IMO. We can't pretend to be a just nation if we don't police ourselves and condemn evil in our midst, and I truly believe that the people at the top of the Bush admin are pure evil.... and I'm not even a Democrat

It'll be one hell of a show, for sure.
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 8
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 11:01:46 PM
It just keeps getting thicker and more up the ladder. They have found evidence that points of guilt that goes all the way to the VP, the former attorney gen, and condi rice, and of course Gonzalez.




Rice, Ashcroft Approved Torture in July 2002

More details have been revealed on high-level Bush administration involvement in authorizing torture. According to a timeline in the newly declassified Senate Intelligence Committee report, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other top White House officials approved torture methods, including waterboarding, as early as 2002. Attorney General Eric Holder has described waterboarding as illegal, while President Obama now says he won’t rule out prosecuting top Bush officials who approved illegal acts. Rice’s backing came in July 2002, when she gave a green light for the interrogation of suspected al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah. One year later, the list of officials voicing approval grew to Vice President****Cheney, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and National Security Council legal adviser John Bellinger.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/23/headlines#1
 bliss serendipity
Joined: 12/27/2006
Msg: 9
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/23/2009 11:33:58 PM
Be damned with any kind of expense. This is why there needs to be an investigation. Time to stop all torture,


I have been silent on torture per se not anymore
by testvet6778
Digg this! Share this on Twitter - I have been silent on torture per se not anymoreTweet this submit to reddit Share This
Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 0355 PM PDT

I watched Darth Vader's daughter on TV this afternoon defending her father, what she does NOT understand her father was evil long before being elected Vice President.

He and Rumsfeld and other members of the Nixon and Ford White House's abused and tortured American soldiers in secret human experiments at places like Fort Detrick (biological weapons) Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland in 1974 and 1975 in chemical weapons and illegal drugs and throw aways from drug companies that did not have marketable products, but may have had military applications.

The "volunteers" were all told the experiments were safe and no one would be harmed and our actions would save lives on the battlefields of the future. Similar to what the British were telling volunteers at Porton Downs, England.

* testvet6778's diary :: ::
*

I am not one of the plaintiffs in this Vietnam Veterans of America, et al. v. Central Intelligence Agency, et al. I am one of the 7120 men used from 1955 thru 1975, when the Army stopped the program upon the release of the 1975 Department of the Army Inspector general Report on Human Experimentation, that found the government was violating the Nuremberg Codes of 1947.

I blame****Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as they both had seats at the National Security Council, Cheney as Chief of Staff and Rummy as Secretary of Defense. To date the government still has failed to help these veterans and or their widows, more than 34 years after the last experiments was conducted.

You will notice in the lawsuit no one is asking for money, they are asking for healthcare, an apology, an admission we were lied to, and some want the medals we were promised. (I have enough, and I damn sure don't want one commemorating that I was a fool).

What This Case Is About
Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief only – no monetary damages – and Plaintiffs seek redress for 25 years of diabolical experiments followed by over 30 years of neglect, including:

the use of troops to test nerve gas, psychochemicals, and thousands of other toxic chemical or biological substances and perhaps most gruesomely, the insertion of septal implants in the brains of subjects in a ghastly series of mind control experiments that went awry;
the failures to secure informed consent and other widespread failures to follow the precepts of U.S. and international law regarding the use of human subjects, including the 1953 Wilson Directive and the Nuremberg Code;
an almost fanatical refusal to satisfy their legal and moral obligations to locate the victims of their gruesome experiments or to provide health care or compensation to them;
the deliberate destruction of evidence and files documenting their illegal actions, actions which were punctuated by fraud, deception, and a callous disregard for the value of human life.
The Complaint asks the Court to determine that Defendants’ actions were illegal and that Defendants have a duty to notify all victims and to provide them with health care going forward.

What is left out of this case, is the fact that the scientists and doctors that worked at our defense agencies spent years traveling back and forth to Gagetown, Canada and Porton Downs, England, where our allies were doing similar experiments, sometimes jointly to see if the results were the same.

This web page on Porton Downs explains the English project since they have Universal Health care, the English paid each of the veterans a small stipend and publicly apologized to them for the betrayal.

This is the history of the Porton Down experiments written by Professor Ulf Schmidt Cold War at Porton Down: Informed Consent in Britain’s Biological and Chemical Warfare Experiments as you can see they were as lax as the American doctors were.

Bottom Line is that the national Security Council in 1974 and 1975 had the opportunity to stand up and say you will NOT use American soldiers as human guinea pigs, they failed to do so, despite the fact that is exactly what they should have done.

I am appalled by what they approved in the past 8 years on detainees, but I am more sickened by what they approved in 1974 and 1975 it is way past time the government is held accountable for torturing foreign detainees and American soldiers more than 30 years ago.

In my opinion Liz Cheney is a apple who did not drop to far from her fathers tree, and for that matter she is her mothers daughter also. Evil is something you know when you see it.

I have seen it and lived thru it. Enough talking about it, prosecute them.


The republicans sure know how to support their troops.

Bliss
 oddandy
Joined: 3/5/2008
Msg: 10
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/24/2009 12:58:52 PM
i am not sure why they would publicly release such photos, as this would be very damaging to the country


If nothing "wrong" was done, how could the pictures be damaging to the country? It sounds like an admission of guilt to want to hide them from public eyes. Remember the old Ashcroft mantra, "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide."
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 11
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/24/2009 1:41:36 PM

the bush white house asked for a legal opinion and got one.
Actually they got lots of them and chose to ignore the ones that would have kept them out of trouble. Those people were so eager to hurt people, apparently so full of hate ... that they actually allowed it to engulf them. They were running rampant like a freaking herd of vampires.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/87344
Report Says White House Rejected All Advice from Government Agencies That Torture Was Illegal
David Swanson
January 09, 2009
REPORT NAMES 30 BUSH OFFICIALS COMPLICIT IN TORTURE

President Bush and his aides repeatedly ignored warnings that their torture plans were illegal from high State Department officials as well as the nation´s top uniformed legal officers, the Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, a new published report states.

"These warnings of illegality and immorality given by knowledgeable and experienced (government) persons were ignored by the small group of high Executive officers who were determined that America would torture and abuse its prisoners and who had the decision-making power to secretly require this to be done," said Lawrence Velvel, chairman of the "Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference On Planning For The Prosecution of High Level American War Criminals." Velvel is a noted reformer in the field of American legal education.

"Far from American officials and lawyers authorizing or engaging in torture because it was lawful, they authorized and engaged in it because they wanted to (and) kept their actions secret from interested officials for as long as they could lest there be strong opposition to the torture and abuse they were perpetrating," Velvel said. "They deliberately ignored repeated warnings that the torture and abuse were illegal and could lead to prosecutions, and they ignored these warnings even when they came from high level civilian and military officers."

A preliminary Report by the Steering Committee seeking Federal prosecution of American officials "who ordered, authorized, approved or committed war crimes," released January 9th, 2009, says they are guilty of "wholesale" violations of statutes that include Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Federal War Crimes Act, the Convention Against Torture, plus numerous other violations of U.S. and international laws.

The Report said prisoners were subjected to savage beatings, sleep deprivation, slow drowning, hanging by chains, being slammed head-first into concrete walls, temperature extremes, food deprivation, burial alive in coffin-like boxes for extended periods, and even threats against their families.
Those that find such things okay ... I think they should volunteer to be subjected to such treatment. Then we'll see if they tell the same story afterward. For sure ... "The Shrub and his gang" should be put through it all.

Among other things, the Report charges the General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency(CIA), knowingly approved of at least 117 renditions to torture and that such renditions were "personally encouraged by President George W. Bush…"
He's lower than the scum of the earth ... lower than slime. But then we've known that for some time.

In addition to President Bush, those named for prosecution by the Steering Committee include:

Vice President D1ck Cheney and his former chief of staff and legal counsel David Addington, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and her predecessor Colin Powell, former Attorneys-General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and his aide Alice Fisher, former deputy assistant Attorney General; and Tim Flanigan, a deputy White House attorney.

Also named by the Steering Committee is I. Lewis ("Scooter") Libby, former assistant to President Bush. Libby was convicted of perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to Federal investigators in the Valerie Plame affair. President Bush commuted Libby´s 30-month prison sentence. Additionally, Douglas Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy; Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, General Michael Dunlavey, and Major General Geoffrey Miller, former commander of Guantanamo prison, Cuba.

CIA officials cited in the Report are former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet; Cofer Black, head of the CIA´s Counterterrorist Center; James Pavitt, former CIA Deputy Director for Operations; General Counsel Scott Muller; Acting General Counsel John Rizzo; David Becker; contract officer James Mitchell, and an unidentified woman that formerly headed the CIA´s Al Qaeda unit and also briefed President Bush.

Among the lawyers guilty of war crimes are former Assistant Attorneys General Jay Bybee and John Yoo; Defense Department chief legal officer Jim Haynes; Robert Delahunty, special counsel with Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice; Patrick Philbin, deputy assistant Attorney General; Steven Bradbury, head of the White House´s Office of Legal Counsel; Lt. Col. Diane Beaver, a former Staff Judge at Guantanamo; Mary Walker, General Counsel of the Air Force and Jack Goldsmith, former head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice.

"Torture and abuse were discussed at meetings of the so-called Principals Committee, where George Tenet presented graphic details of interrogations to a Committee which included some of Bush´s highest associates, including Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft and Cheney and, at times, John Yoo.

The above-mentioned Bush officials were involved in shaping or carrying out torture policies despite written and/or verbal warnings given by high government officials in the Pentagon, State Department, FBI, and other agencies. Among these objectors were:

William Howard Taft IV, the Legal Advisor to the State Department whose 40-page memo of January 11, 2002 warned Bush´s claim the Geneva Conventions were not applicable to prisoners held by the U.S. could subject Bush to prosecution for war crimes. State Department lawyer David Bowker further warned "there is no such thing" as a person that is not covered by the Geneva Conventions.
 oddandy
Joined: 3/5/2008
Msg: 12
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/24/2009 1:54:46 PM

When they cut off Daniel Pearl's head the video included pictures of Abu Ghraib...only a college Prank...........


How damaging was that?


Good point. It goes to show how such barbaric "techniques" actually put Americans at more risk. I wonder if the torture apologists will ever admit it?
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 13
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/25/2009 3:01:31 PM

It horrifies me that anyone would want to look the other way under the guise of "we can't afford the mess." I don't think we can afford to ignore such a mess.
I've felt all along that there were many more "messes" than just this torture thing that we couldn't ignore, but unfortunately, no one in the right position has had the spine to deal with it.

Actually, if I be frankly honest ... I hope we can get these guys and prosecute them to the fullest, but I think we all know that will never happen. No one is going to send "The Shrub" and his gang to jail ... eh? You know if they do, the Neocons will be out after more than just blood. In the pursuit of all that ... we lose focus of what is on the current agenda and the country suffers ... the little guys suffer.

Those people that did this awful stuff have millions to live on. They never have to work another day in their lives. They could take off to parts unknown and never look back.

In the meantime, we spend all kinds of money, precious time and energy going after what we know doggone well are basically the scum of the earth. No one gains anything from it except the lawyers who represent both sides.

Would it please me to no end knowing that they're sitting in some jail cell ... maybe even having to endure some of the stuff they put others through? You betcha it would.

Would I sleep better knowing that they are sitting in some jail cell? I doubt it.

Just remember ...
**Even though Nixon was caught and he admitted he was guilty, there are still those out there that thought he was in the right ... hold him up as a great president.
**Even though "The Shrub" has gone on national TV and admitted there were never any WMD's ... there are still those who insist there were WMD's and "The High Functioning Moron" was right to invade a sovereign nation.
**Even though there has never been any connection of Iraq to 911 ... there are still those who insist we were right to invade a sovereign nation (Iraq) because of 911.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 14
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/25/2009 4:43:29 PM

Actually, if I be frankly honest ... I hope we can get these guys and prosecute them to the fullest, but I think we all know that will never happen. No one is going to send "The Shrub" and his gang to jail ... eh? You know if they do, the Neocons will be out after more than just blood. In the pursuit of all that ... we lose focus of what is on the current agenda and the country suffers ... the little guys suffer.


What you're suggesting is insane. You think we should hold our elected leaders responsible for their actions? Please keep in mind the Law of Unintended Consequences. Holding politicians accountable could lead to honest politicians, effective government, rational laws, increased public participation in government, a functioning justice system, efficient public works projects, better access to pharmaceuticals and other medical treatments, and respect from other world leaders. In short, the United States that we all know and love will cease to exist. What's your next bright idea, world peace?
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/25/2009 7:24:30 PM

What you're suggesting is insane.
Sigh ... I suppose somewhere along the line, I may have ... okay, I suppose I could plea temporary insanity ...


You think we should hold our elected leaders responsible for their actions?
Well, um ... I was simply saying ... um ... ya? I do think we should hold elected people (not necessarily leader-types even though they like to think they might be leaders) responsible for their actions. I know, I know ... what the H3ll was I thinking?


Holding politicians accountable could lead to
** honest politicians,
** effective government,
** rational laws,
** increased public participation in government,
** a functioning justice system,
** efficient public works projects,
** better access to pharmaceuticals and other medical treatments, and
** respect from other world leaders.

In short, the United States that we all know and love will cease to exist.
Oh dear ... I suppose I need to be careful what I wish for ... right?

What's your next bright idea, world peace?
Yuppers ... I'm one of the original hippies that used to sing about "All we are saying ... is give peace a chance".
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 16
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/27/2009 7:03:33 AM

but honsetly.. who do you think would end up in jail? rummy? cheney? who?
Hopefully "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron" and his whole damn gang of thugs.


and next time the white house calls for an opinion on oh...pretty much everything... academia will not be jumping up and down to offer any expert opinions...
I think you're mistaken. The so-called "expert opinions" were hand-picked.

Many experts gave their opinion and "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron" hand-picked the ones he wanted (just as he hand-picked the WMD information). He wanted to torture those people and so he chose to pick so-called "expert opinions" that said torturing people was okay. That DOES NOT make torturing people okay.

If "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron" had chosen the "expert opinions" of those who stated that torture was illegal ... then (duh) torturing those people would have been "illegal".

I say we should throw "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron" and his whole damn gang of thugs in prison and leave them there to rot. It's the process that we have to go through in order to accomplish putting them in their rightful place that causes me concern.

It's something that needs to be done, but at what price to our nation? We have suffered enough shame and lost all kinds of moral standing in the world related to the reign of "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron" ... and now this!!!!
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 17
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/29/2009 6:48:54 AM
I think what we need to consider here is ... how would we treat a person who might capture someone (consider a loved one) and do the same to them? What would it take for any of you posters in here who are promoting the torture?

How about if we just call water boarding and sleep deprivation and being "walled" (head repeatedly being slammed up against a wall) ... "antagonizing".

What would any of you in here do if someone "antagonized" a loved one like that?

What would any of you in here do if someone "antagonized" a loved one like that more than 150 times?

How many times do you think you could withstand getting your head slammed up against a wall ... and live through it?

What we don't have ... we have no statistics about how many people were killed using some of the techniques described as "acceptable interrogation techniques".

What if we find out that numerous captives were killed like that?
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 18
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/30/2009 9:15:56 AM
Go onto the internet and watch the video of Daniel Pearl being decapitated and then tell us how you think sleep deprivation, barking dogs and nudity equate?

If my son new of and refused to divulge plans for an impending terroist strike which would murder thousands .... I would water board him myself!
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 19
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/30/2009 2:29:42 PM
your son would confess anything you wanted to hear to stop the" interragation tactic"(ie torture) that is classic example why it would not and does not work to extract reliable info


I guess you missed the memo from Obama's guy

"High-value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country," Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair said in a memo to personnel.

It's pretty clear by that statement that the interrogation meathods did work.

It's hard to compare barking dogs, nudity, sleep deprivation, and even waterboarding with decapitation.
If you want to know what torture really is go ask Daniel Pearl.
How many have the courage to watch Daniel Pearls torture?
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 20
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 4/30/2009 7:09:45 PM
Lar there is no problem with saying "We are better than that". That argument I accept.
However to equate dogs barking, nudity, sleep deprivation and even water boarding with true War crimes of the past century such as the Nazi medical experiments, Nazi Holocaust, The Bataan Death March, David Pearl and other innocents executed is a absolute insult to the memory of those who died fighting for our North American freedoms.

People who suggest such should be charged with "Hate Crimes"!
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 21
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 5/3/2009 5:21:08 PM

Most People demanding a full inquiry are very patriotic ...
I .agree.
Unfortunately, in the past we have been accused of being UNpatriotic ... just because we demand the truth.

... only wanting to restore the values this country has always stood for.
Ya ... that describes how I feel.

I'd like to see things get back to pre-Bush standards. That "High Functioning Moron" took our country to an all-time low. Time to get back some class.

OT ...
Time to put "The Shrub"/"The High Functioning Moron' in prison with his band of thugs. Let them rot there.
 Kaos86
Joined: 3/7/2007
Msg: 22
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 5/3/2009 5:57:41 PM

I'd like to see things get back to pre-Bush standards. That "High Functioning Moron" took our country to an all-time low. Time to get back some class.

Ahhh yes the good old days.....

The good ole days when a Bill Clinton bj meant some 3rd world pharmaceutical factory had a US missile dropped on it.(see Sudan)
Yes that would be much better than barking dogs and loud music.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 23
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 5/3/2009 8:43:02 PM

The good ole days when a Bill Clinton bj ...


Get over his bj already ... are you jealous?

FYI ... Clinton's bj never put our nation at risk ... never caused him to invade a sovereign nation ... never caused him to change the constitution ... never sent our nation into bankruptcy ... THE LIST GOES ON & ON & ON & ON ... and on and on and on.

All I really want is for the appropriate people to get the time they deserve. So far, it appears to be "The Shrub" and his gang of thugs.

I say ... send them to prison and just throw away the key.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 24
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 5/4/2009 7:03:55 AM

... you do realize that during war enemy pow's can be held until cessation of hostilitites?
Since when did invading a sovereign nation constitute war?

As noted before ... it has already been established that the majority of the people being held are nothing more than innocent people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There is no argument that justifies torture ... except perhaps mean ... evil ... demented. All of which perfectly describes "The Shrub" and his gang of thugs.

Put them in prison and throw away the key.
 kabiosile
Joined: 11/3/2005
Msg: 25
view profile
History
Torture-memo-prosecutions … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?
Posted: 5/5/2009 10:19:07 AM
Holding prisoners of war is hardly the issue. The issue here is that many of them were tortured under the last administrations orders. Yes they should go through some type of trial as well but, the biggest concern to me is the torture issue and I do not care who ordered it and ends up punished. This is not about "revenge" or anything other than not allowing an atmosphere of impunity. If these people are allowed to get away with torture, it sets up a number of things to occur none of which are good for our nation nor the safety of any Americans be they military or civilian whom become abducted by other nations. Things like the beheading are a direct result of the torture and mistreatment committed in Iraq.

I am certain our government did not sign all those treaties and conventions against torture, because they are all nice guys whom would never torture. They signed them because they know it would protect our boys as well. The purpose was to not have what happened a lot during WW2 and nam on BOTH SIDES. The purpose was to set it in international law and agreement to not to engage in this kind of sick behavior. It is our law too once we signed it and in fact it is a felony




The Geneva Convention, which has been ratified by the U.S. and is therefore the law of the land, is explicit and categorical in banning torture, the use of "violence," "cruel treatment" or "humiliating and degrading treatment" against a detainee "at any time and in any place whatsoever." The War Crimes Act of 1996 [26] made any grave breach of those restrictions a U.S. felony.



It is an absolute outrage that ANYONE working for any part of our government shadow op or not, to authorize torture which is more than obvious that it was authorized.

The reason these people MUST be punished no matter how high up it goes. Is not just simply because they broke the law but, also because in the case of torture, if we do not prosecute those responsible for those orders and actions, it sets the stage with impunity where I can with certainty tell you it will happen again soon.


Listen to how these scumbags replied to questions about torture at Abu Ghraib some of their quotes are astonishing! It also set the stage for the torture of people in other locations because little to nothing was done other than to the rank and file soldiers whom were more than likely "following orders." <---Though that is no legal excuse and I believe they should be punished as well. The grotesque part is that they punished the soldier but, let the ones whom ordered them get away!






Defense Secretary Rumsfeld stated, "What has been charged so far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture. I'm not going to address the 'torture' word."


Here he was speaking specifically about Abu Ghraib! ARE YOU SERIOUS?!!!!

I think they should open up the war crimes tribunals personally. This has nothing to do with politics to me. If it was my own father whom gave the orders to do that stuff I would be absolutely disgusted with him and stand in opposition to him, give them their trials and let justice be served!






In November 2008 Lord Bingham, the former UK Law Lord, describing the treatment of Iraqi detainees in Abu Ghraib, said: "Particularly disturbing to proponents of the rule of law is the cynical lack of concern for international legality among some top officials in the Bush administration."


How very true. He should try being from the nation whom has leaders whom authorized and then dismiss torture like it is normal practice or tip toe around the word and say it was only abuse.....

International law.



Al-Qaeda detainees would likely not be accorded POW status, but the Conventions still provide explicit protections to all persons held in an international armed conflict, even if they are not entitled to POW status. Such protections include the right to be free from coercive interrogation, to receive a fair trial if charged with a criminal offense, and, in the case of detained civilians, to be able to appeal periodically the security rationale for continued detention.[66]

The Convention Against Torture defines torture in the following terms:

Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him... information or a confession, punishing him for an act he... has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him.
—United Nations Convention Against Torture, (Article 1)







In November 2006, the former US Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, in-charge of Abu Ghraib prison until early 2004, told Spain's El País newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Donald Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation. "The methods consisted of making prisoners stand for long periods, sleep deprivation ... playing music at full volume, having to sit in uncomfortably ... Rumsfeld authorized these specific techniques." She said that this was contrary to the Geneva Convention and quoted the same "Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind". According to Karpinski, the handwritten signature was above his printed name and in the same handwriting in the margin was written: "Make sure this is accomplished". There have been no comments from either the Pentagon or US Army spokespeople in Iraq on Karpinski's accusations.[97][98][99]

The above quotes came from wikipedia.com






Image of someone being tortured with "waterboarding." Warning this is graphic in nature.

http://image.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/waterboarding1.jpg
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > "Torture-memo-prosecutions" … to prosecute or NOT to prosecute … what would be best?