Bin Laden is dead

[WC_lun]

I find it interesting that you claim t believe in individuals rights etc, yet you make exceptions for the use of torture. Something doesn't equate here.

 

[granfire]

once again, as an American who is a conservative who votes for the republicans as the lesser of two bad political parties, I believe in individual human rights, the U.S. constitution, the Bill of rights, I believe in freedom of speech and of the press, I believe that the central government should be small and hedged in by strict checks and balances on its power, that taxes should be low, spending by the government should be low.

yes, we know, as long as you like the people, you like them to have rights...when you don't like them you think water boarding is ok...

I am still curious that individuals who believe in a massive central government that controls your health care, your retirement, with fewer checks and balances, individuals who believe in high taxes, especially on the rich, and massive spending programs by the strong central government thinks that I believe in anything close to the socialism that one saw in the national socialism in Germany or in the right wing governtments in spain and chile.

Ah, I see you got a new blender...mixing all kinds of things up.
Oh, yes, the news that exempting the rich folks from taxes has done nothing for the common good has eluded you. And for the love of me, I cannot fathom why anybody who is likely not rich by any stretch of imagination supports the ongoing cuts. They buy Paris Hilton a couple of new handbags to add to her collection, each worth more than the average American brings home every month, having to pay bills and feeding their family from.
And as usual you have no clue about the history behind a strong central government, good, bad, ugly or indifferent. You just love to throw all kinds of things into one pot and give it a whirl...that works only in the kitchen, and only to some extend....

Tez, you were out when I found some great new information on why the facists in Italy, and the National socialists in Germany were closer to the communists in Soviet russia than the people on the left want to admit. I will post them again when I get home. there is also an explanation of the military dictatorships in Chile and spain that also explains where you are once again mistaken.

You found similarities in dictatorships around the world....big whoop. Newsflash - and Tez has been telling you this since the First Thanksgiving - dictatorships are run on the same premise. Always have, always will: Cut right f the individual...you know, those things you wnt for yourself, but love to deny those who don't think like you...

Sadly, it is big government that endangers and enslaves people, and those governments always get their starts by saying the rich are bad people, let's take what they have and give it to everyone else. What the people who believe in that philosphy fail to realize, is that once the government has the powere to take everything the wealthy have, they have exactly what they need to take everything that everyone else has as well.

Hey Chicken Little, the sky is falling on you! Why are you worried about the rich getting billed? When did that brainwash start to gain a foothold?

Then again... trying to convince you otherwise it an exercise in futility. You are like those folks you can see in the news reels of the early 1940s: Happily signing away personal freedom for the illusion of pride, because a snippet of the message stuck a cord with them. Those people were not leftists, they were conservative to the core. Suck on that for a minute and let the image sink in.

But Breitbard and stoessel say different...what the hell do the real historians know, after sifting through tons of documents and analysing miles and miles of documentary footage....

 

[granfire]

I find it interesting that you claim t believe in individuals rights etc, yet you make exceptions for the use of torture. Something doesn't equate here.

He is comfortable with the double standard, as long as you don't touch his rights, screw everybody else...

 

[Empty Hands]

I'd like to find out more about more about the new stealthy helicopters that made this mission possible. It's not like the OBL villa was in a cave in the middle of nowhere, it is in a military town and near the Pakistan Army Academy, that I would presume would have some sort of air defenses and monitoring; or, at the very least, an increased level vigilence.

Disclaimer: I am no expert. My understanding though is that "stealth" helicopters had more to do with being quiet, to avoid giving warning of an approach, rather than being harder to detect by radar. Since helicopters can fly extremely low, I thought they were already difficult if not impossible to find by radar if the pilot wants it that way.

 

[billc]

Actually, I make limited exceptions for waterboarding non-citizens who are unlawful enemy combatant terrorist leaders who refuse to cooperate and prevent the maiming, and murder of innocent people around the world. You could actually site what I have said instead of misleading people about what I actually believe.

I would not water board U.S. Citizens or foreign nationals.
I would not water board regular criminals who fall under the civillian criminal system.
I would not water board regular terrorists captured on the battlefield.
I would not waterboard terrorists captured in the continental united states, even a leader unless it could be shown he had information of an imminent attack.

***I would water board leaders of terrorist groups, who refuse to cooperate, are captured in foriegn countries, fighting as unlawful enemy combatants, who are determined to have information pertaining to up coming terrorist attacks.

At this point that is a total of 3 people. So yes, I guess one who is unrealistic could pretend that my stance on individual rights is hypocritical. I'll live with that silly belief.****

 

[granfire]

Actually, I make limited exceptions for waterboarding non-citizens who are unlawful enemy combatant terrorist leaders who refuse to cooperate and prevent the maiming, and murder of innocent people around the world. You could actually site what I have said instead of misleading people about what I actually believe.

I would not water board U.S. Citizens or foreign nationals.
I would not water board regular criminals who fall under the civillian criminal system.
I would not water board regular terrorists captured on the battlefield.
I would not waterboard terrorists captured in the continental united states, even a leader unless it could be shown he had information of an imminent attack.

***I would water board leaders of terrorist groups, who refuse to cooperate, are captured in foriegn countries, fighting as unlawful enemy combatants, who are determined to have information pertaining to up coming terrorist attacks.

At this point that is a total of 3 people. So yes, I guess one who is unrealistic could pretend that my stance on individual rights is hypocritical. I'll live with that silly belief.****

Are you making up these rules as you go?
your first 3 points set the rules you break at your leasure a couple of lines below...

Who gets to decide if a person is a 'top three' on the list. Do you figure that out before you torture, or after?

Alone that fact of capturing people 'in foreign countries' is a big red flag.
I mean...how is your stand of people being captured on US soil by foreign powers?

You are always making excuse so you can continue torture.

This is not a video game! You can't turn it off for a cup of coffee! Things you do have consequences and ripple effects.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

"At this point" means "In the future I will make additional exceptions as I see fit to meet a sliding series of definitions, again as I see fit."

But remember, "The Constitution is just a God Damned piece of paper". - GW Bush.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I mean...how is your stand of people being captured on US soil by foreign powers?

Good question. Obviously if it's ok (read legal) for the US to send in a covert team to capture/kill an enemy on foreign soil, it's just as legal for say, Iran to send in a covert team to the US to kill/capture one of the Joint Chiefs of Staff maybe? All they have to do is declare them 'unlawful combatants'.

I wonder what the US response would have been to the Iraqi Republican Guard "liberating" us from the totalitarian Bush administration?

Though I do enjoy the idea of waterboarding Dick Cheney.

 

[crushing]

 

[WC_lun]

It really amazes me that someone can make a case for the use of torture, at all. It is like rape. There really is no case where it is acceptable. Given the right wing's epenchant for using the slippery slope arguement, I find it even more amazing that they would think the torture of anyone would be okay.

So it is okay to torture only really evil men. Who decides? So if there is a really evil American out there, like the US soldiers who raped the Iraqi teenager and killed her family, is it okay for the Iraqi government to torture them to find out how far the cover up went? what about a serial killer? Would it be okay to torture a convicted serial killer in order to find all the bodies? What about a pedophile in order to help his victims? We have law that says we do not torture at all. It doesn't say, well we don't torture unless we think you are a bad man. It doesn't ay we make up rules to justify it. It says we don't torture, peeriod.

 

[MA-Caver]

It really amazes me that someone can make a case for the use of torture, at all. It is like rape. There really is no case where it is acceptable. Given the right wing's epenchant for using the slippery slope arguement, I find it even more amazing that they would think the torture of anyone would be okay.

So it is okay to torture only really evil men. Who decides? So if there is a really evil American out there, like the US soldiers who raped the Iraqi teenager and killed her family, is it okay for the Iraqi government to torture them to find out how far the cover up went? what about a serial killer? Would it be okay to torture a convicted serial killer in order to find all the bodies? What about a pedophile in order to help his victims? We have law that says we do not torture at all. It doesn't say, well we don't torture unless we think you are a bad man. It doesn't ay we make up rules to justify it. It says we don't torture, peeriod.

It probably only applies to not torturing U.S. citizens... anyone beyond that, that is out to hurt the American people ... is fair game.

 

[Empty Hands]

It probably only applies to not torturing U.S. citizens... anyone beyond that, that is out to hurt the American people ... is fair game.

The law prohibits acts, generally speaking, not targets. It's not OK to murder someone because they aren't a US citizen. It isn't OK to travel to Thailand to have sex with children, they will bust your *** on the way back in. It isn't OK to cheat someone who isn't a citizen, etc. The law is binding under all who are in its jurisdiction, citizen or not, and that jurisdiction includes members of the military or the intelligence services.

 

[Big Don]

It really amazes me that someone can make a case for the use of torture, at all. It is like rape. There really is no case where it is acceptable. .

Really? I mean there aren't cultural norms we need to consider? I've seen that used to excuse murder and child molestation...

 

[yorkshirelad]

My comments weren't aimed at you but Yorkshirelad. I now know why he holds such antipathy to the UK and myself. The Troubles have cause much heartache and division over a long time, guess it will carry on for many years yet. Muslim terrorism is in it's infancy compared to Northern Ireland.

Not so fast Irene, my father is a staunt Irish Republican and my stepfather, who was far more a father to me was a British soldier and former copper. I have great admiration for Her Majesty. As far as the treatment of Irish Republican terrorists go, I couldn't care less if they get a boot in the face by a para, or even if they get slotted in their beds by an SAS trooper. I just don't like Blighty pure and simple.

 

[yorkshirelad]

Bush, Cheney and several other high level members of that administration have warrants out for their arrest in at least 2 European nations, by my last check oh, 2 years ago.

Like this means anything! Even if Bush went to Spain on a Thomas Cook package holiday, they wouldn't have the balls to arrest him. It's a joke!

 

[yorkshirelad]

He actually makes me want to throw up.

You wouldn't think him quite so harmless if you realised his type of talk and justifications were and are still being used to keep people bound up in dictatorships. Look at Nazi Germany, Argentina under Pinochet, Spain under Franco etc etc. It may seem amusing but the reality is that if too many people think his way and get into power you can say goodbye to your freedom.

The above countries are not the US. We have three branches of government as a means of checks and balances There cannot be a dictatrial government here because of the system. If all else fails, we have a constitutional right to arm and defend ourselves from a tyrannical government. This right is at the moment being undermined by Democrats who think the only armed citizens should be employed by the government....scary!!

 

[billc]

You guys might want to e-mail Colonel Bud Day and explain to him how waterboarding is on the same scale as what he endured:

http://olotliny.wordpress.com/2009/...-of-honor-recipient-prisoner-of-war-survivor/

Once again: Waterboarding is the one of the least harmful of all the types of physical harsh interrogation techniques. After someone is water boarded, they dry off, put on dry clothes and they are fine, no short or long term physical harm. Their sinuses might be a little raw, but probably no more than a bad alergy attack. And they even get over that. Their skin is not broken, no bones are broken, no short or long lasting harm is done.

I would not do it to American citizens or foreign nationals here in the states.
I would not do it to criminals covered by the civillian justice system.
I forgot in the previous post, I would not do it to regular Prisoners of war who deserve to be covered by the geneva conventions.
I would not even water board the regular, run of the mill terrorist captured on the battlefield, unless it could be shown he knew of an imminent attack.
I would not waterboard terrorists captured on U.S. soil.

I would, without hesitation, waterboard a known terrorist leader, who was an unlawful enemy combatant, not fighting for a nation state, who will not cooperate, who is determined to know of possible attacks on innocent civillians. Their status to be determined by our intelligence agencies and intelligence gathered on the battlefield. AT this point that means 3 individuals were waterboarded.

It is easy to say that you would never waterboard anyone. By not doing it,you will never know what you failed to prevent. so as bodies are dragged out of the rubble of another building bombed, with widows, widowers and orphans looking on as their maimed or killed loved ones are pulled out, you can be comfortable knowing that you did not stoop to waterboarding 3 people. It is an easy position to defend, nothing will ever be connected back to your decision. Waterboarding is the least harmful of the techniques of physical interrogation, as Bud Day and Leo Thornson put it, it is harsh treatment, not torture. They should both know, look them up.

 

[Empty Hands]

It is easy to say that you would never waterboard anyone. By not doing it,you will never know what you failed to prevent. so as bodies are dragged out of the rubble of another building bombed, with widows, widowers and orphans looking on as their maimed or killed loved ones are pulled out, you can be comfortable knowing that you did not stoop to waterboarding 3 people.

That reasoning can be used to justify anything. Why not rape, maim, murder innocent family members, nuke a city of residence? After all, the alternative could be worse.

For a "small, non-tyrannical government" kind of guy, you sure want to give the government wide latitude to torture based on hypothetical alternatives.

Hell, let's go all the way with this reasoning. The Holocaust was completely justified. Why? The Jews might have actually been planning worldwide domination. Can't be too careful, the hypothetical alternatives sure are terrible!

 

[Blade96]

He actually makes me want to throw up.

You wouldn't think him quite so harmless if you realised his type of talk and justifications were and are still being used to keep people bound up in dictatorships. Look at Nazi Germany, Argentina under Pinochet, Spain under Franco etc etc. It may seem amusing but the reality is that if too many people think his way and get into power you can say goodbye to your freedom.

I never said his beliefs are, I said he is. He's a guy posting on a message board.

Now if he was getting close to being able to decide rules and policy of a country and waterboarding and stuff, that would be another litter of kittens.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

US law defines waterboarding as torture.
US law defines torture as illegal.
Both waterboarding and torture are denied as means for law enforcement in the US to extract information.
Did I mention, both waterboarding and torture are illegal under US, as well as international law???

http://lawreview.wustl.edu/slip-opinions/waterboarding-is-illegal/
(This is by the way, a link to an in depth review of the legal argument, by people who know these laws, case law, treaties, etc more completely than I ever will. I differ to their experience in the matter.)

Waterboarding and the other forms of torture approved by the Bush administration for use in the War on Terror are inconsistent with our Nation’s deepest values and traditions.[57] Our grandparents defeated the Germans and the Japanese in World War II, and our parents overcame the Soviet Union and China during the Cold War. They did so without using torture, even though our enemies did.[58] In fact, this is a principal factor that distinguished us from our enemies. Alexander Solzhenitzen’s Gulag Archipelago, Arthur Koester’s Darkness at Noon, and William Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich told us the nature of our enemies, whom we justifiably considered to be evil because of how they treated their prisoners. But through all of these military and political struggles, we did not torture captured soldiers or political prisoners. Instead, America led the world community against the use of torture.[59]

Furthermore, there are instrumental arguments against the use of waterboarding. First, torture is neither an efficient nor an effective means of gathering intelligence.[60] Second, waterboarding prisoners violates our treaty obligations, thus offending our allies in the War on Terror.[61] Third, by engaging in this practice ourselves, we invite our enemies to treat our captured soldiers likewise,[62] and if our government adopts the position that waterboarding is legal, then we will have given up the right to prosecute our enemies for subjecting our soldiers to this treatment.[63] Finally, in the event that we were to obtain useful information from a prisoner by means of waterboarding, it would be virtually impossible to prosecute the prisoner because coerced confessions[64] and any evidence obtained by means of a coerced confession[65] are constitutionally inadmissible, despite provisions of the Detainee Treatment Act and the Military Commissions Act which purport to preserve the admissibility of coerced confessions.[66]

The policy considerations which militate against the use of waterboarding are compelling, but they are not relevant to assessing the legality of the practice. Regardless of its utility or lack of utility as a method of interrogation, waterboarding violates both the letter and the spirit of the Torture Act, the War Crimes Act, and the Prohibition against Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. Accordingly, waterboarding is illegal.

So I repeat, it's ok to break the law if you deem it acceptable?