Where Do You Stop With Torture?

[Article 15]

I thought we were supposed to provide links.. and only post a paragraph or so followed by a link.. isn't that called "the fair use policy"????

Check post #3, Willow

Thank You,, I found it. I wish these bloggers would provide links to the documents they refer to.. If they have access then why can't they share them?

np, I made the same mistake you did at first.

And my guess is that 90% of the time they leave out the links because it takes away their ability to frame the issue to their liking.

 

[rayboyusmc]

Because my dear willow, I'm using a new browser and it doesn't work as well as Enigma for finding the previous llink.

If in fact teenagers were abused congress should be addressing the situation by secret grand jury.

Why in secret? It anyone violated laws to this extent, they deserve public exposure. Find out what the facts are and then if true, public trial would be just fine. Maybe something like this would help US get our moral compass back.

 

[del]

Because my dear willow, I'm using a new browser and it doesn't work as well as Enigma for finding the previous llink.

If in fact teenagers were abused congress should be addressing the situation by secret grand jury.

Why in secret? It anyone violated laws to this extent, they deserve public exposure. Find out what the facts are and then if true, public trial would be just fine. Maybe something like this would help US get our moral compass back.

grand juries, which indict, are always secret.
you been here in the states long?

 

[RodISHI]

Because my dear willow, I'm using a new browser and it doesn't work as well as Enigma for finding the previous llink.

If in fact teenagers were abused congress should be addressing the situation by secret grand jury.

Why in secret? It anyone violated laws to this extent, they deserve public exposure. Find out what the facts are and then if true, public trial would be just fine. Maybe something like this would help US get our moral compass back.

For who? Those who wish to destroy this nation. Piss on the morals projected by the "OPEN Society" concepters.

grand juries, which indict, are always secret.
you been here in the states long?

Point.. Good one Del.

 

[Sinatra]

Because my dear willow, I'm using a new browser and it doesn't work as well as Enigma for finding the previous llink.

If in fact teenagers were abused congress should be addressing the situation by secret grand jury.

Why in secret? It anyone violated laws to this extent, they deserve public exposure. Find out what the facts are and then if true, public trial would be just fine. Maybe something like this would help US get our moral compass back.

grand juries, which indict, are always secret.
you been here in the states long?

No kidding! Is that guy for real? At times it seems he is just some character who pops in here and purposely posts remarks that are obviously meant to convey stupidity.

 

[JimH52]

Cheney has no regrets over torturing people. He is making the talk show rounds so he can sell his book. I hope he keeps talking. Sooner or later he is going to give up something that will be a potential legal issue. W is staying pretty quiet. Maybe W was the brains of the duo?

 

[ba1614]

I would not advocate torture period. As far as trials go? I doubt it. Incompetence was there before Bush and Cheney got there. Fact is we should be holding the countries where these terrorist breed more accountable for the action of their citizens. I doubt that will work though as we do not hold the people accountable in our own country for all of the crimes they commit. The current banking crisis is testament to that.

If in fact teenagers were abused congress should be addressing the situation by secret grand jury. Not in the public on the Internet or the public rumor polls. We are still at the moment a soveriegn nation. Personally I would like to keep it that away. I could care less what the majority of posters post on some Internet BS lines. I say that knowing the spam that goes out to attempt to influence the minds of the masses out in cyberland. It is also for that exact and same reason I believe to much mis-information is spread around. The illusions of safety when in fact there is none when our top agencies movements are not kept confidential by our leaders.

Good post RodISHI!

 

[rayboyusmc]

No kidding! Is that guy for real? At times it seems he is just some character who pops in here and purposely posts remarks that are obviously meant to convey stupidity.

As in your comments are always of the most ultimate in wisdom or non partisan one?

And please answer, S, do you condone torturing children of terrorists?

I don't read these threads that much anymore because of the lamedick righty remarks about Obama. Your side lost and can't comprehend or deal with that. As Pogo would have said in the past, go ahead and leave the country.

 

[rayboyusmc]

You can listen to the audio.

01/08/06 "revcom.us" -- -- John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.

This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.

What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat.

It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo."

This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world.

Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Bush Advisor Says President  Has Legal Power to Torture Children

 

[del]

You can listen to the audio.

01/08/06 "revcom.us" -- -- John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.

This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.

What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat.

It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo."

This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world.

Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Bush Advisor Says President* Has Legal Power to Torture Children

*yawn*

that's nice, ray.

 

[Sinatra]

You can listen to the audio.

01/08/06 "revcom.us" -- -- John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.

This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.

What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat.

It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo."

This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world.

Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Bush Advisor Says President* Has Legal Power to Torture Children

*yawn*

that's nice, ray.

I am being totally serious here - is this rayboy character for real or is it some kind of put on?

Can anyone really be this stupid?

Even bobo does not come off this inane,

Well, most of the time anyways...

 

[rayboyusmc]

Sinny Boy, is the audio false? Or are you deaf?

Or do you support torturing children.

You seem to protest to much.

 

[rayboyusmc]

After all the shit comes out in the open, we will ask who's head is up their ass?

 

[garyd]

Rayboy you idiot define children. One suspects that most of what these lunatics are calling children areprobably 18 and over. And lets not forget that our lovely enemies send kids as young as 12 into combat. Hell we've got reports of 15 year old suicide bombers.

Does rendition equal we don't send then to Gitmo? What do you suggest we do with them if we don't send them to their native countries?

 

[Xenophon]

The ultimate in stupid argument:

"THINK OF THE CHILDREN!"

 

[Newby]

All you have to do is go back in time, and the "D" stance on this is completely different. They say whatever they have to say for political expediency and to maintain positions of power, period. None of them are ever intellectually honest or without hypocrisy,

Chuck Schumer in June of 2004:

These comments were made during a hearing of the senate judiciary committee on june 8th, 2004. senator chuck schumer (D-NY) is discussing harsh interrogation methods, saying to attorney general john ashcroft:

“And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this. I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if thousands of lives are at stake. Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all, would say, Do what you have to do. So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal.”

"And I respect -- I think we all respect the fact that the president's in the foxhole every day. So he can hardly be blamed for asking you or his White House counsel or the Department of Defense to figure out when it comes to torture, what the law allows and when the law allows it and what there is permission to do."

 

[rayboyusmc]

Garyd, you idiot, they were the children of one of the captured terrorists, you moron. They were not captured on the battlefield. Do you have kids. Can we crush their balls to get you to talk?

As to the D thing, more of the idiocy from the right.

They say whatever they have to say for political expediency and to maintain positions of power, period. None of them are ever intellectually honest or without hypocrisy, Such a an all encompassing statement reveals your stupidity or your blind partisans ship. I am trull sorry for you - butwipe.



Your side has become downright stupidified in your loss.