Oh the self righteous libs. They think the lawyers who gave opinions on waterboarding should be
investigated. Gary says it's obvious they're just trying to justify torture. Of course gary can read minds so he knows.
Nancy Pelosi KNEW about the water boarding and everything else but either didn't care or didn't believe it was torture until it was usefull to her politically.
Now what about RENDITIONS? From what I understand this involves transporting captured enemies to countries that use torture to get information from them. Hmmm.....
So we have actually participated in torturing people, and the reason I bring this up is the Holder hearings. He was asked if he was aware of this practice going on during his time in the Clinton administration and his answer was YES. How many? He'll get back to us on that but he knew about it. Of course it doesn't happen anymore though right? Wrong. It's going on today in the Obama administration.
Hmmmm......
7 comments:
What is the basis for saying that renditions are going on in the Obama administration? I knew about Clinton, not at the time but it came out later. Of course torture is the whole point of the rendition program.
We could debate whether or not any specific technique is torture. But there is no doubt that detainees were tortured. Hell, some were beaten to death. Some were waterboarded 183 times. And torture is a crime, under national and international law.
But I forgot, you don't believe in the law.
So should there be prosecutions? Legally, yes. Politically, well that's debateable.
You're just an idiot. So is "the law" schtick of yours the new "consensus".
What about contract law? Does that count?
Of course not when its Obama breaking it.
Your life is a lie.
Um, ok sure contract law counts, but we're talking about the law against torture, which is more serious. So let's stick to the point. Copying video tapes is also against the law (confession: I've done it) but I've never tortured or murdered anyone.
Torture is intentionally inflicting severe mental or physical pain or suffering. That's the legal definition under the UN Convention Against Torture and the accompanying domestic law. The Convention is a treaty and is the "supreme law" of the land under the US Constitution which you conservatives give lip service to.
Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or "outrages upon personal dignity" are also illegal. The law rules out this type of treatment against "all persons." NO extraordinary situations may be used to justify torture under the law.
The UN Convention Against Torture was supported by Ronald Reagan, by the way.
1. we respect the law and the constitution.
2. we don't believe waterboarding is torture
3. we are actually torturing people just not here and not at GITMO
so the point of the post is why is everyone so upset about waterboarding? why are we pretending to give a shit? why did Obama release these documents?
why is Holder investigating anyone when he himself was intimately involved in renditions during his time in the Clinton admin. and is intimately involved now?
Or was he just following orders?
I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. I'm not in favor of torture, but then again i don't have all of the details. We don't know how effective it is, or how many lives may have been saved using various techniques.
cite whatever studies you want, but you don't know either.
We can disagree as to whether waterboarding is torture. I would argue that waterboarding someone 30times in a day is torture.
Specific techniques aside, it is good to see that you agree that people were tortured and that you are not in favor of torture. But if people were tortured, and if it's illegal, and if there is no legal justification for torture under the law, then on what legal basis do you oppose prosecution?
I oppose prosecuting people based on their opinions. Holder isn't going after the people who actually tortured someone. He's not going after the people who ordered the torture. He's not saying he'll go after Nancy Pelosi who at the very least knew about what was going on and didn't do ANYTHING to stop it. NO, Holder and Obama want to pick on the lawyers who disagree with them that waterboarding or catepillaring is torture. and why??????
If there was such a thing as an honest liberal they would be up in arms about this bullshit! It's LITERALLY the thought police in action! I'm fine with the prosecutions as soon as Holder prosecutes himself and Janet Reno and Bill Clinton first for ADMITTING TO CONGRESS IN OPEN HEARINGS THAT HE APPROVED RENDITIONS.
HOLDER PERSONALLY SENT PEOPLE TO THE TORTURE CHAMBERS!!!!!!! HE DOESN'T DENY IT!!!!!
Why then are we ruining the lives and careers of people who wrote an opinion that disagree's with what George Soros believes? Oops, did i just give away the answer? Sorry to ruin it for you.
If anyone should be prosecuted it should be the people who ordered the torture. Not the people who did it(unless they went beyond what was authorized). As for the memo writers, no I don't think they should be prosecuted, and I'll leave it up to the Bar as to whether they should be disbarred.
Actually, unlike many liberals, I don't think there should be prosecutions. That's a close call for me, because I am strongly against torture or any mistreatment of prisoners. Also, legally there probably should be prosecutions. But I think it would be too divisive.
Post a Comment