Coreece 190
Recommended Posts
TomAiello 26
QuoteEven if they had DOJ approval, their conscience knew something was wrong. It would be hard, but their moral conviction should have prompted them to take further action to stop such abuse
Essentially, they're dealing with a change in law, and we're talking about retroactive prosecution based on the new law.
An equivalent situation would be if the Supreme Court ruled tomorrow that abortion was, in fact, legally murder, and then doctors who'd performed abortions over the past 40 years were suddenly liable to prosecution for their (then-legal) actions.
-- Tom Aiello
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
'e was a fucking great big 'Liney' - I wasn't going no where near them animals
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
JackC 0
QuoteIF anyone is going to get screwed over it needs to start at the top who gave the directives and justified that shit in the first place.
The people who actually did this should cop for it. The Lawyers who signed this off as legal should cop for it. But most of all and top priority, the people who set this as official policy should cop for it. They all knew what they were doing.
jcd11235 0
QuoteIt SHOULD start at the top. President Bush should have known or been briefed on the happenings. If he was, then he should be called on it. If he wasn't, why not?
I agree that he should be called on it if he knew. Heck, as CinC, he should be called on it whether he knew about it or remained willfully ignorant.
However, I think an international judicial venue is a more appropriate forum for him to receive a fair trial and found guilty or not guilty. A not guilty verdict would make any trial appear to the international community to lack credibility. In an international or foreign court, a not guilty verdict would be less likely to further damage the US' image abroad.
I think Obama's reasoning with respect to CIA agents is similar to Ford's reasoning behind pardoning Nixon. We, as a nation, need to put it behind us and expend our energy moving forward. However, unlike Watergate, laws against torture (and possibly other war crimes) are not merely national laws, but international laws. Thus, the international community has a stake in seeking justice.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
TomAiello 26
Honestly, I'm a fan of the South African model. You hold a big forum for "truth and reconciliation" or something, and move on.
It does appear that most of those who currently hold power view the last administration as something akin to Apartheid era South Africa.
Makes me wonder, will we need another "truth and reconciliation" forum when the democrats leave the white house in another 8 years?
Maybe it ought to just become a fixture of the inaugural process--sort of a monument to the bitterness and division that seem to have come to dominate the American political process.
It does appear that most of those who currently hold power view the last administration as something akin to Apartheid era South Africa.
Makes me wonder, will we need another "truth and reconciliation" forum when the democrats leave the white house in another 8 years?
Maybe it ought to just become a fixture of the inaugural process--sort of a monument to the bitterness and division that seem to have come to dominate the American political process.
-- Tom Aiello
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Quote
He is excusing torture by excusing the tortures [full-stop]
No, he's just moving forward. For the same reason that he and Pelosi shut down any of the impeachment silliness after the Democrats had the power to actually make it happen.
He settled the matter on what is permitted (for at least as long as the Dems hold the White House), and is going to focus on the current problems. Pissing off the GOP even more isn't going to help with that.
Quote
I think the best way to determine if something is "torture" is to take an American soldier who has been tortured as a POW, let him see what's going on, and ask him what he thinks.
.
I'd consider the guys who were responsible for these things perfectly qualified to determine whether they are torture...after they've been subjected to comparable treatment.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
jcd11235 0
Quote… a fucking great big 'Liney' …
Would you kindly translate liney into proper English, please? It appears to be one of those words that never made it past the beta version of the language.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
TomAiello 26
QuoteI'd consider the guys who were responsible for these things perfectly qualified to determine whether they are torture...after they've been subjected to comparable treatment.
It's my understanding that they all had to be subjected to the techniques they used as part of their training. Same idea as making police get sprayed in the face with pepper spray before they start carrying it.
-- Tom Aiello
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Amazon 7
QuoteQuoteNote that I still think the guys relying on official DOJ interpretation should not be the scapegoats here.
Amen to that....
IF anyone is going to get screwed over it needs to start at the top who gave the directives and justified that shit in the first place.
A part of me wants to agree with you here (and trust me... a big part doesn't just to be ornery)
It SHOULD start at the top. President Bush should have known or been briefed on the happenings. If he was, then he should be called on it. If he wasn't, why not?
But.... I don't know that those who did the abuses should get off scott free. Even if they had DOJ approval, their conscience knew something was wrong. It would be hard, but their moral conviction should have prompted them to take further action to stop such abuse
Ever met any of those guys???
I have.......And there is a SERIOUS lack of a moral compass among many of them. There is a predeliction of not how the game is played.. but whether they win or lose..regardless of the means used to get there.
QuoteQuoteI'd consider the guys who were responsible for these things perfectly qualified to determine whether they are torture...after they've been subjected to comparable treatment.
It's my understanding that they all had to be subjected to the techniques they used as part of their training. Same idea as making police get sprayed in the face with pepper spray before they start carrying it.
So Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, et al, got waterboarded? I kinda doubt it.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
TomAiello 26
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'd consider the guys who were responsible for these things perfectly qualified to determine whether they are torture...after they've been subjected to comparable treatment.
It's my understanding that they all had to be subjected to the techniques they used as part of their training. Same idea as making police get sprayed in the face with pepper spray before they start carrying it.
So Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, et al, got waterboarded? I kinda doubt it.
No. I meant the guys who actually performed the interrogations---the ones who people are discussing prosecuting or not.
-- Tom Aiello
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com
QuoteQuote… a fucking great big 'Liney' …
Would you kindly translate liney into proper English, please? It appears to be one of those words that never made it past the beta version of the language.
A Liney in the RAF works on the Flight Line - they have a well deserved reputation for being Hairy Arsed fuckers (Animals).
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'd consider the guys who were responsible for these things perfectly qualified to determine whether they are torture...after they've been subjected to comparable treatment.
It's my understanding that they all had to be subjected to the techniques they used as part of their training. Same idea as making police get sprayed in the face with pepper spray before they start carrying it.
So Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, et al, got waterboarded? I kinda doubt it.
No. I meant the guys who actually performed the interrogations---the ones who people are discussing prosecuting or not.
There is a big difference. First, the trainees are doing it voluntarily, second, they know it has limits and is going to stop before very long.
QuoteAt one point in history, AKA, 1947, "I was only following orders", was found to be an unacceptable defense for torture, murder and other war crimes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
The torture that was performed was illegal and the perpetrators should be prosecuted for their actions. In no way, shape or form is it legit to "write a legal memo" to allow that which is illegal. Those that were asked to perform illegal acts should have said NO. Those that followed illegal orders should be prosecuted, ALONG WITH those that gave the orders.
Where are the righties on this one?
I thought that y'all were true believers in the rule of law. Apparently not, based on how much you are defending the criminals.
Also in 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out various acts of torture including waterboarding. Asano was sentenced to 15 year hard labor.
funjumper101 15
QuoteSeveral field officers objected to the interrogation techniques and requested clarification. The Justice Department (same folks who would now prosecute them) issued a written opinion which those officers relied on.
It would be the height of hypocrisy for the Justice Department to now change it's official position (which it issued to basically tell the doubters to get back in line) and start prosecuting the very same people who had questioned it's wisdom previously.
I totally disagree.
A memo from the Justice department saying that illegal activities are legal, DOES NOT IN ANY WAY make those activities legal.
All of the people who questioned the orders were correct. It is my understanding that there are quite a few people who did the right thing and lost their jobs and careers, along with their pensions, when the refused to follow the illegal orders from shrubco. Those folks need to be re-instated and the ones that followed the orders, prosecuted.
We cannot allow this to happen. If this stands, what is to stop future adminstrations from doing exactly the same thing?
The people responsible, and those that carried out the orders, must be held accountable.
I see your position as totally un-American and against everything that this country is supposed to stand for.
What was done was, and is illegal. It has been for generations.
No memo, no matter who wrote it, or who approved it, changes that inconvenient truth.
Those that did not have the moral and ethical wherewithal to resist illegal orders must be held accountable.
This is very simple. Torture was and is illegal. No memo, no matter who approved it, can change that.
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteSeveral field officers objected to the interrogation techniques and requested clarification. The Justice Department (same folks who would now prosecute them) issued a written opinion which those officers relied on.
It would be the height of hypocrisy for the Justice Department to now change it's official position (which it issued to basically tell the doubters to get back in line) and start prosecuting the very same people who had questioned it's wisdom previously.
I totally disagree.
A memo from the Justice department saying that illegal activities are legal, DOES NOT IN ANY WAY make those activities legal.
All of the people who questioned the orders were correct. It is my understanding that there are quite a few people who did the right thing and lost their jobs and careers, along with their pensions, when the refused to follow the illegal orders from shrubco. Those folks need to be re-instated and the ones that followed the orders, prosecuted.
We cannot allow this to happen. If this stands, what is to stop future adminstrations from doing exactly the same thing?
The people responsible, and those that carried out the orders, must be held accountable.
I see your position as totally un-American and against everything that this country is supposed to stand for.
What was done was, and is illegal. It has been for generations.
No memo, no matter who wrote it, or who approved it, changes that inconvenient truth.
Those that did not have the moral and ethical wherewithal to resist illegal orders must be held accountable.
This is very simple. Torture was and is illegal. No memo, no matter who approved it, can change that.
IF, and only if what was done was torture. It was not. And whether or not you argree with me does not matter. Cause the courts do agree with me. THAT is why Obama says he will not go after anybody. As if his admin could do legally anyway. After all, he is in the executive branch of our gov, not the judicial branch.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
funjumper101 15
IF, and only if what was done was torture. It was not.
It appears that you are doing the same thing you always do.
What could make you think that waterboarding is not torture?
Conviction in 1947 and during the Viet Nam war, for those that did it, aren't proof enough for you?
John McCain himself said it was torture.
Does it have to be on drudge and newsmax to become believeable to you? What would it take?
A memo from the Justice Department? I believe that already happened.
rushmc 23
Quote
IF, and only if what was done was torture. It was not.
It appears that you are doing the same thing you always do.
What could make you think that waterboarding is not torture?
Conviction in 1947 and during the Viet Nam war, for those that did it, aren't proof enough for you?
John McCain himself said it was torture.
Does it have to be on drudge and newsmax to become believeable to you? What would it take?
A memo from the Justice Department? I believe that already happened.
Post links to back up your assurtions and dont bother with McCain, he changed his tune durning the compain when he stoped licking the balls of the lefties to try and get elected. Oh, and McCain was the poorest fucking choice the party could make. I would only vote for him because I knew we would get what we got now if did not win
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
There is also this method:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEBCIjar8ls&feature=related
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites